Talk:Atom (science): Difference between revisions
imported>Paul Wormer |
imported>Chunbum Park (edintro) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
NOTE: The <code><nowiki>{{editintro}}</nowiki></code> template atop the article page should be removed prior approval. | |||
<!-- DO NOT ARCHIVE ABOVE THIS LINE --> | |||
The atom page was previously deleted (several months ago), but I believe that a page on atoms is both needed and necessary for the success of any compendium of human knowledge. I intend to continue working on it and develop this page into a worth while entry.{{unsigned|Ethan Karpel}} | The atom page was previously deleted (several months ago), but I believe that a page on atoms is both needed and necessary for the success of any compendium of human knowledge. I intend to continue working on it and develop this page into a worth while entry.{{unsigned|Ethan Karpel}} | ||
:It was probably deleted because it might have been a direct import from WP's version. It was decided at some point during the Big Cleanup to remove such directly-sourced articles with little or no revisions, which is why it was removed (most likely explanation). In any case, welcome to CZ and totally have at it! --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 22:16, 30 October 2007 (CDT) | :It was probably deleted because it might have been a direct import from WP's version. It was decided at some point during the Big Cleanup to remove such directly-sourced articles with little or no revisions, which is why it was removed (most likely explanation). In any case, welcome to CZ and totally have at it! --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 22:16, 30 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 08:52, 1 January 2008
NOTE: The {{editintro}} template atop the article page should be removed prior approval.
The atom page was previously deleted (several months ago), but I believe that a page on atoms is both needed and necessary for the success of any compendium of human knowledge. I intend to continue working on it and develop this page into a worth while entry....said Ethan Karpel (talk) (Please sign your talk page posts by simply adding four tildes, ~~~~.)
- It was probably deleted because it might have been a direct import from WP's version. It was decided at some point during the Big Cleanup to remove such directly-sourced articles with little or no revisions, which is why it was removed (most likely explanation). In any case, welcome to CZ and totally have at it! --Robert W King 22:16, 30 October 2007 (CDT)
QM
Ethan, Don't forget to link somewhere to hydrogen-like atom, where the SE is solved. Cheers, --Paul Wormer 10:32, 1 November 2007 (CDT)
Posited
Paul, would you consider to replace the text "The idea of an atom dates back to the ancient Greeks who posited" with "The idea of an atom dates back to the ancient Greeks who postulated" or "The idea of an atom dates back to the ancient Greeks who proposed"? After looking up the meaning of posited, and thinking for a while, I can't recall any time I saw that word used recently. I think the alternatives I proposed might have a better recognition rate, so improving comprehension. Or maybe I just need to increase my vocabulary :-) Ewan Nisbet 03:05, 1 January 2008 (CST)
- OK go ahead, change whatever you want in my English. BTW I did not import anything from Wikipedia, I take offense of this sort of infamous suggestions :-) --Paul Wormer 05:12, 1 January 2008 (CST) PS As far as I remember, I wrote only the small part under the heading "nineteenth century". --Paul Wormer 05:15, 1 January 2008 (CST)