Talk:Beryllium

Another horrible fundamentalist mineral to debunk!--Bob^{bing up} 12:32, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

Don't worry, there will be plenty more where that came from. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 12:52, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

Mmmm - and their relevance to the RationalWiki "we are not an encyclopaedia" mission would be?--Bob^{bing up} 14:16, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

Hmm, guess you have a point. I'll try to spin them in the right direction next time. Maybe I'll stick to ones that are already referenced in other articles that DO follow the RW mission (but noting the plethora of articles that don't). Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 14:28, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

I must admit that we do tend to suffer from "mission creep" from time to time. It's just that I was worried that we were going to get stubs on the entire periodic table - something that would probably be best left to WP. I don't want to teach my grandmother to suck eggs - but you have read - RationalWiki:Project Whitewash/What is a RationalWiki article, haven't you?--Bob^{bing up} 14:37, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

I was going to, but thought better of it, even before having this dialogue, because how much can one write about strontium that isn't encyclopedic? If I can't make this page more RW friendly, I will delete it. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 14:57, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

And four months later, it's still here. Totnesmartin 04:27, 27 February 2009 (EST)