Talk:Cargo cult science

message: This entry has a lead-in but no pay off! The reader needs to know what defines cargo-cult science well enough to identify in operation on his own. Wetman 10:40, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: Proposal to selectively merge this article into Richard Feynman. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  No opposition to the alternative of merging to Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think there needs to be any expansion, the "selective merge" could just be a redirect, but I have no opposition to merging it into the book. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:   No problem with me, anything goes, as long as it is not merged into Pseudoscience as was once suggested. - DVdm (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: You haven't read WP:MERGE properly, it gives an exception for  There is no need to move the discussion now. Hemiauchenia (talk) 06:41, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right. Sorry about that. How about a WP:MUTUAL for this section (the break and everyrhing under it up to and including this reply)?—Alalch E. 08:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: *Support Per my previous comments in this discussion. There's just not enough good sourcing to write a coherent independent article about this topic. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  No opposition to the alternative of merging to Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think there needs to be any expansion, the "selective merge" could just be a redirect, but I have no opposition to merging it into the book. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:   No problem with me, anything goes, as long as it is not merged into Pseudoscience as was once suggested. - DVdm (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Polling

message: *Bad WP:PROPMERGE. Proposed merge discussions are held on the target article's talk page. This is needed to be able to form a consensus about the state of the target page after merger. Further, the lack of clarity and agreement about the target, due to the discusssion not being held on the target's talk page, may hinder consensus forming and cause confusion. (If the proposal is to merge X to Y and you oppose merging X to Y and support merging X to Z, that's not a "support" !vote but an "oppose" !vote.) Proposing a merger is not congruous with . Whether and what content will be merged is something to be decided at Talk:Richard Feynman—how will that article (which is a featured article by the way) benefit from the added content?Editors at the target article have not even been notified of this discussion on its talk page.This discussion should be moved to Talk:Richard Feynman, and this is why I am seeking admin help (it can be literally copypasted there, or closed here and quoted there).If the responding adminsitrator declines, just ignore this comment.—Alalch E. 21:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You haven't read WP:MERGE properly, it gives an exception for  There is no need to move the discussion now. Hemiauchenia (talk) 06:41, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right. Sorry about that. How about a WP:MUTUAL for this section (the break and everyrhing under it up to and including this reply)?—Alalch E. 08:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snowball Clause?