Talk:Periodic table of elements: Difference between revisions
imported>Aleksander Stos m (rm categories meant for mainspace) |
imported>Petréa Mitchell (Article checklist) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{checklist | |||
| abc = Periodic Table of Elements, The | |||
| cat1 = Chemistry | |||
| cat2 = | |||
| cat3 = | |||
| cat_check = n | |||
| status = 2 | |||
| underlinked = n | |||
| cleanup = y | |||
| by = [[User:Petréa Mitchell|Petréa Mitchell]] 22:47, 27 April 2007 (CDT) | |||
}} | |||
==Discussion Area== | ==Discussion Area== | ||
Revision as of 22:47, 27 April 2007
Workgroup category or categories | Chemistry Workgroup [Categories OK] |
Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
Underlinked article? | No |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | Petréa Mitchell 22:47, 27 April 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
Discussion Area
Rob, I've removed the approval template that you added to the article. Please see Approval Process. A single individual, who has worked on an article (as you have this one), should avoid nominating an article for approval unless there are two other Chemistry editors who are on hand and who have declared their willingness to approve the article as well. Even if there are other editors at work on the article, even if in allied fields such as biology, you still need two more chemistry editors. Sorry, but that's the rule that we decided on back in December. --Larry Sanger 12:21, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
The stamp (toapprove) has been here for over 4 weeks, NO chemistry editor in that period even was online, or have been for even some longer period. We can however remain sitting like a lame duck and do nothing. Waiting for editors to come aboard and be active. This is what I will do from now on. Thank you for pointing me to that. Robert Tito | Talk 14:33, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Unfortunately, that's what we have to do! But it is a problem that can be corrected. I think it will be corrected, in fact, either after we grow some more, or when we start up our new workgroup announcement lists--so, you'll be able to reach all the chemistry editors who agree to receive occasional messages. --Larry Sanger 14:56, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
Also, it would be great if the image of the Periodic Table were large enough to read. You need to make two clicks [1] in order to read this one. The Wikipedia article does a good job on this score. See [2] --Larry Sanger 12:24, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
The information in that table is just a fraction of the information in the used table. Any other example on WP also uses the two clicks. I could have placed a very simple table here, I wanted it to have relevant data. And in ONE jpg no links to other pages as these distract from the info. Robert Tito | Talk 14:33, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Well, it's just my opinion and I won't insist on it strongly, but it is frustrating for me to see that there is a lot more information on that particular table, and yet not be able to see it without clicking through. A simpler table, that one can use to click through to the individual elements, would be better, IMO. However, this is your decision, Chemistry Editor. We can always, of course, link to the bigger and better table. --Larry Sanger 14:56, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
My point is, Larry. The table can be used in both directions - omitting the information in the overview (that is the table) wouldn't make it easy to understand the coherence of the table. In that case the info would be in the individual eement pages, that was and is something I wanted to avoid. You look for instance to electronegatively while traversing horizontally, or shell configurations while traversing vertically. When you only have the name of the element such details will be overlooked and will not be evident. The coherence from the information of each individual element does not point to these obvious (for a chemist) uses. Accepting the double click is IMHO the better didactical option. Robert Tito | Talk 15:05, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Chemistry Category Check
- General Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Chemistry Advanced Articles
- Chemistry Nonstub Articles
- Chemistry Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Chemistry Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Chemistry Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Chemistry Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Chemistry External Articles
- Chemistry Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Chemistry Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Cleanup