This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tone
After some editing I removed the 'tone' stub and the piece seems to me reasonably clear and encyclopedic. I welcome suggestions for improvement. Andrea Saltelli Saltean (talk) 11:27, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
New revision
Notability - A search for the string "extended peer community" in inverted commas on Google Scholar returns 1540 entries. I submit that this indicate academic interest for the concept.
Personal essay - In my revision I considerably shortened the discussion, eliminating what might be seen as 'essay' part and adding reference by various scholars directly engaged with extended peer communities.
Neutrality - The concept - that is relative to possibly conflicted policy setting - may not be perceived ad neutral, but is it considered in both academia and science for policy, where the presumption of neutrality is itself contested. STS literature is concerned with issues of non-neutrality in relation to the use of science for policy, see e.g. the works of Sheila Jasanoff on technologies of humility.[1]
References
- ^ Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science. Minerva. Vol. 41. 3. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025557512320.