Anyone can participate in the WikiProject. The collection of articles in this project aspires to be authoritative and comprehensive, but gaps exist with respect to clarity, scope, and supporting references.
Technical experts are always needed, but nonexperts can contribute by improving readability.
Guidelines for editing are listed in WP:NOT. Some highlights that are particularly relevant to this project:
WP:SECONDARY and WP:TERTIARY. The most desirable references are to reviews and books (including ebooks). Many such sources are behind paywalls, unfortunately.
WP:RS. Claims require reliable sources. The definition of RS can be ambiguous in the case of patents and dissertations. Some concern exists about citing predatory journals.
WP:MEDRS. Claims related to human health require especially strong supporting references, read: secondary and tertiary.
WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia presents facts. It is not a textbook replete with explanations. The difference between an encyclopedia and a textbook can be subtle however.
WP:COI. Editors avoid topics where they have a conflict of interest, or at least they disclose their conflict. "Ref spamming" by authors of journal articles is a persistent problem.
WP:UNDUE. The space allocated to subtopics within an article should reflect their relative significance. Of course, defining "relative significance" can be non-obvious.
Who's editing?
These sites list many of the more active editors in this project and the related Chemicals project:
Organic Syntheses. Classic compendium of procedures with references to alternative routes and historical context. Qualifies as a secondary source (review). http://www.orgsyn.org
