| Revision as of 17:31, 1 July 2006 editDLH (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,171 edits Added Headings, references← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:16, 1 July 2006 edit undoDuncharris (talk | contribs)30,510 edits {{talkheader}}, {{controversial}}Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{talkheader}} | |||
| {{controversial}} | |||
| Added summary of Sternberg's perspective. | Added summary of Sternberg's perspective. | ||
| Corrected misstatement on societies position regarding peer review and gave a quote of one of the stated reasons. | Corrected misstatement on societies position regarding peer review and gave a quote of one of the stated reasons. | ||
Revision as of 18:16, 1 July 2006
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sternberg peer review controversy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Added summary of Sternberg's perspective. Corrected misstatement on societies position regarding peer review and gave a quote of one of the stated reasons. Regrouped material. Added Added quote by Sternberg on the actual peer review process and results with link. DLH 03:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Added summary quote by Sternberg on peer review. DLH 03:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Added headings to clarify the discussion. Reordered & regrouped to clarify. Added contrasting references, links.DLH 17:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Categories: