Difference between revisions of "Talk:978: Citogenesis"
(Created page with "Bonus points if the editor citing the work is also the person who created the fake source!~~~~") |
Quicksilver (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Bonus points if the editor citing the work is also the person who created the fake source!'''[[User:Davidy22|<span title="I want you."><u><font color="purple" size="2px">David</font><font color="green" size="3px">y</font></u><sup><font color="indigo" size="1px">22</font></sup></span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC) | Bonus points if the editor citing the work is also the person who created the fake source!'''[[User:Davidy22|<span title="I want you."><u><font color="purple" size="2px">David</font><font color="green" size="3px">y</font></u><sup><font color="indigo" size="1px">22</font></sup></span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The title text is not addressed in the explanation. I've read some popular science books, but they do not seem to suffer the problem cited there. Maybe there's a particular brand of pop science that is very susceptible to that sort of problem? --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 17:48, 17 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:48, 17 August 2013
Bonus points if the editor citing the work is also the person who created the fake source!Davidy22[talk] 06:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
The title text is not addressed in the explanation. I've read some popular science books, but they do not seem to suffer the problem cited there. Maybe there's a particular brand of pop science that is very susceptible to that sort of problem? --Quicksilver (talk) 17:48, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
