Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, science, and technology

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:

Talk:Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243

Should we principally refer to Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243 as a "crash" or an "accident"? guninvalid (talk) 23:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:COVID-19 lab leak theory

Do sources support retention of "the lab leak theory and its weaponization by politicians have both leveraged and increased anti-Chinese racism."

Or should we remove it (as unsourced) or re-write it to only say ""the lab leak theory increased anti-Chinese racism."?

• A Keep
• B Remove
• C Re-write

Slatersteven (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Grand Canyon University

How should Wikipedia's voice describe the current for-profit/non-profit status of Grand Canyon University?

• Option 1: Do not describe GCU as presently "for-profit" or "non-profit" in Wikipedia's voice (such as in this revision); or
• Option 2: Describe GCU in Wikipedia's voice as presently a "for-profit" institution (such as in this revision);
• Option 3: Describe GCU in Wikipedia's voice as presently a "non-profit" institution.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather

Should we have notability standards for individual tornado articles? We already have informal inclusion criteria for "Tornadoes of YYYY" articles. Below is a preliminary proposal for such criteria, with the hope that it can evolve into a formal guideline that can possibly be referenced in future AfD discussions.

Previous discussions: New tornado articles and the news, Proposal - Criteria for inclusion on Tornadoes of XXXX articles

This has been nagging at me for a while now, and since another editor has talked to me about this issue, I think we bring this up. Since we have a sort of "inclusion criteria" for "Tornadoes of YYYY" articles, I suggest we come up with notability criteria for individual tornadoes as well. See User:EF5/My tornado criteria for what this may look like.

This is my very primitive way of determining the notability of several tornado articles I've written, and am hoping that it could be integrated into a refined set-in-stone WPW policy that could be used in actual AfDs. I'd assume that the table will be gotten rid of and turned into a list. This has been discussed in the past, but never really came to anything. Maybe it could be... WP:NTORNADO (with it's own project page)? Starting an RfC, since obviously community input is needed. Also pinging @Departure–:, who suggested this. :) E_F⁵ 18:56, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Catnip

Should the lead of the article mention alternatives that may affect cats not affected by catnip? Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2020 Cookeville tornado

I have serious doubts about the authenticity of the tornado image in the article, including whether it was truthfully even taken in Cookeville. The image mentions it was taken from Reddit, and searching the image on Reddit reveals a high level of skepticism even from users there. I propose that this image be discussed and potentially removed unless it can be otherwise proven that the picture was taken in Cookeville on March 3. United States Man (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather

Should weak and unimpactful tornadoes be included in list articles? Departure– (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)