Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive January 2020
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Gleason's theorem nominated for Good Article status
I've nominated Gleason's theorem for Good Article status, because after a few episodes of improvements, I've run out of ideas for further ones. XOR'easter (talk) 18:02, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Can anyone review Paris Herouni?
I am hopefully wrong, but it seems a bit promotional. I don't have enough knowledge though to be sure. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 19:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- WP:PROMOTION applies to self-promotion, but since the guy is dead apparently he just has a lot of fans. I don't know anything about him or the subject, but the article does read a bit fanboyish. Tercer (talk) 23:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- This is just my impression, and it may be skewed by odd cases, but I feel like I've seen more overhyped scientist biographies from Eastern Europe than any other region. XOR'easter (talk) 00:32, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Anatoly Kuzovnikov also needs evaluation. XOR'easter (talk) 20:59, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- And Viatcheslav Artaev. XOR'easter (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Can we get some knowledgeable physicists and cosmologists to help at Fine-tuned universe...
There is an editor coming to this article for the first time that is changing the article wholesale including delete cited and referenced quotes from physicists like Paul Davies and Victor Stenger. The editor has totally deleted cited quotes directly related to the article content from recognized authorities in the field.
Thank you for help. 69.5.112.154 (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Mass at Simple English WP
Please could someone check over the recent rewrite of the mass article at Simple English Wikipedia? The recent edits seem to have made it more difficult to follow than the mass article here. I just wondered what editors here thought of it. I am posting here due to the lack of active physics editors over there, and I hope this is OK. Please feel free to remove this post if not. --Thrasymedes (talk) 21:10, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
- I reverted the changes. They clearly violated the principles of the Simple English Wikipedia.--Srleffler (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- Apart from being difficult to follow they were also utter nonsense. --mfb (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you both for your help. It did seem like a case of WP:FRINGE to me, but I wanted to confirm this with others. Srleffler, thanks also for picking up on the similar case, potential energy, which the user also rewrote. --Thrasymedes (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- Apart from being difficult to follow they were also utter nonsense. --mfb (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
This deletion discussion may be of interest to the community here. XOR'easter (talk) 15:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)