Talk:Crystallography
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Crystallography article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
|
|
This level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Liquid Crystals Should be Added
[edit]I think a comment should be added in the introduction about liquid crystals and perhaps a separate section as well. Liquid crystals may not seem to be crystals to a traditional geologist, but they have the properties of crystals according to physicists. With the ever growing presence of liquid crystal displays (iPods, cell phones, gaming devices, computer screens, TVs), the average reader may end up on this page upon wondering how his iPod screen works only to be told that crystals are solid. 129.63.129.196 (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Article badly needs improvement
[edit]Among other things to be fixed:
- Introduction (article lead) is way too long relative to the article; it has a hodgepodge of stuff that belongs in the body of the article, or should be deleted as redundant. See MOS:LEAD for guidelines on writing the intro; it is usually best to keep a minimal intro until the rest of the article is written and stable.
- "Notation" doesn't belong here because it is too specialized; it should be merged into crystal structure. or deleted if it is redundant.
- "Reference literature" probably should be called "Further reading", in accordance with Wikipedia article standards.
- "Scientists of note" and "See also" are waaaaay too long. Their content is useful, but it should be placed into a new infobar template, something like the Geology one already at the end of the page.
- I haven't even waded into the deeper content of the article, but suspect there is a lot of room for improvement.
Reify-tech (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Moved section on Women in x-ray crystallography
[edit]I have moved this section to X-ray crystallography, as it seems more appropriate there. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:26, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Split x-ray diffraction out of X-ray crystallography
[edit]I propose splitting X-ray diffraction out of X-ray crystallography, discussion started at Talk:X-ray crystallography#Split x-ray diffraction and crystallography. The two are not the same, and there are many areas of XRD where the focus is not on detailed determination of atomic positions. Examples are powder diffraction where comparison is made to known samples, SAXS and many more. There are many areas/pages where it is relevant to say "use XRD" but wrong to say use "X-ray crystallography This would also help to improve the current rambling X-ray crystallography page. Comments to the X-ray crystallography talk page please. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Physical sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
- C-Class physics articles
- High-importance physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of High-importance
- C-Class Chemistry articles
- High-importance Chemistry articles
- WikiProject Chemistry articles
- C-Class Geology articles
- High-importance Geology articles
- High-importance C-Class Geology articles
- WikiProject Geology articles
- C-Class Technology articles
- WikiProject Technology articles
- C-Class Rocks and minerals articles
- High-importance Rocks and minerals articles
- High-importance C-Class Rocks and minerals articles
- WikiProject Rocks and minerals articles