Talk:Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 January 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs, Lisa Randall offers a credible but "far from compelling" hypothesis for why dinosaurs became extinct?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs.

Wikipedia

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Theory"[edit]

I question the hook proposed for DYK. The book's central idea is not a scientific theory, given the lack of supporting evidence. The word "hypothesis" would be a better choice. Jonathunder (talk) 15:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There seems to be some misunderstanding from book reviews about the use of the term "theory". Jolly Ω Janner 17:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Speculation" would be an even better word. 68.19.10.148 (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]