This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot(talk | contribs) at 07:25, 31 January 2024(Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Chemistry}}, {{WikiProject Physics}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 07:25, 31 January 2024 by Cewbot(talk | contribs)(Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Chemistry}}, {{WikiProject Physics}}.)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry
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
I don't think there is anything wrong with this article. From the style differences, one can still tell that it has been written by several authors over time. More detailed discussions that are backed up by a long list of references make a lot of sense to scientists - that is actually what they are looking for in any review article. Sure the general public is not interested in science at the active research scientist level, so what? Worst cause of action would be to water a good article down because a professional wikipedia editor thinks the general public has a problem with this article? Kind regards, Peter Moeck, Professor of Physics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.175.148 (talk) 02:12, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg?lang=en){kind=small}
