This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article seems to focus on chemical labs, or at least labs related to chemistry. There are other places called 'labs' that don't fit the description, e.g. computer labs. I suggest this article be renamed 'Chemistry laboratory' (or 'Laboratory (chemistry)') and 'Laboratory' be made a disambig. What do you think? Ddawson 09:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
G'day all, Unfortunately, I'm not cluey enough to figure out how to make a formal request for a clean-up/collaberative effort etc, however anyone who comes across this message, please tag as appropriate.
In my personal opinion, I think that this should really be a catagory, with the specifics of particular laboratories confined to their own articles. In which case, this article (as it currently stands) would have to be moved to something like "Laboratory_(Chemistry)". Any thoughts?
My particular specialty here is that I work in a Civil Engineering lab, which is so far from what this article (currently) describes, that it almost is insulting to the profession! And as such, there's almost no direction that I can take with regards to incorperating what I know with this article, as it would require an EXTREME re-write. And if that's to occur, then all fields need to be represented otherwise a complete re-write will have to occur again, and again, and again, and again!
Any thoughts out there wikipedians? Cheers -- Sjkebab 12:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me - I haven't done any work on my side of this yet, as I've been on holidays. Although, is "Wet Lab" the correct title? No idea personally... -- Sjkebab 06:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
While I'm not opposed to moving the current article, I do question whether separate articles are warranted. There are thousands of kinds of labs, both "wet" and "dry", corresponding to the many different purposes of individual labs. There is a lot of overlap; for example would an electrochemistry lab be covered by "Laboratory_(Chemistry)" or "Laboratory_(Electronic)"? Articles for each would risk being repetitive and boring. Yet all labs have the common purpose of providing a controlled environment for scientific study. Safety is paramount in all labs, both for the public (harmful agents must be contained, whether biological viruses in a microbiology lab or computer viruses in a malware lab), and for the human occupants (both staff and, in some types of labs, subjects). -- Rick Sidwell 16:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Lab is not always chemical. Physical laboratories may have little or no dangerous chemicals.
Are all not covered properly. Please don't delegate anymore articles out. Sure some we have enough info on to write separate articles but I don't see the possibility a massive outpouring of academic students to flesh out a "Metallurgy lab" article, ever. We need to cover them all with their own section. We need book sources as well.-- I'll bring the food ( Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 04:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was really bothering me. I rewrote it to take a more generic approach and removed the cleanup and globalize templates, replacing them with the expand template (as the article is still incomplete). The material from the old page should probably be incorporated back into this article or into other more specific articles (especially wet laboratory) but I don't have time to do this right now. Maybe I can work on it bit-by-bit later. Hopefully this new article provides a better basis for improvement... -- User:Ajwitte
this song is fast u bye..haha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.47.62 ( talk) 13:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Baho niyo sulat niyo nalang.. xD —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
222.127.219.13 (
talk)
10:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are not in a lab you are forbidden to study with explosives and you are most likely able to get jail time. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.227.222 ( talk) 22:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
-- 222.64.25.74 ( talk) 00:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.64.25.74 ( talk) 00:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know which term is more appropriate
-- 222.64.219.241 ( talk) 00:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.64.219.241 ( talk) 00:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I just created the entry for Reagent bottle. If you have more useful and knowledgeable information, please do add it. Radical Mallard ( talk) 16:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved: insufficient support. DrKiernan ( talk) 09:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Laboratory →
Laboratory (scientific research) – Current name is confusing since laboratory is really a generic name for multiple uses as made clear in the article lead. I see two options. Since this article is mainly focused on research, move it to the
Laboratory (scientific research) of more simply
Laboratory (research). Then create at the main name space a dab page or, as suggested above, a generic article about laboratories in general.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
17:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
I already added some information about history of laboratories. If anyone wants to add more information please do it, but please do not forget to check that the information is from reliable sources. -- Nalatpohn
The beautiful Geneticist Riin Tamm is not wearing properly her protective lab coat in the image... — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenPaulJonas ( talk • contribs) 09:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Is this really necessary? Do I have agreement to remove it? Skullcinema ( talk) 15:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
illustrations for apparatuses 154.229.129.151 ( talk) 03:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
The current short description for this article reads "Facility that provides controlled conditions for scientific or technological research, experiments, and measurement". That's hopelessly long (115 characters as against a maximum of about 40 per WP:SDSHORT). It misunderstands the whole purpose of short descriptions, improperly attempting to define the subject matter, contrary to WP:SDNOTDEF, rather than providing "a very brief indication of the field covered by the article" or "a short descriptive annotation"
I've made two suggestions so far, "Facility for science or technology" (34 characters) and "Facility providing controlled conditions" (40), but have been reverted twice, in each case back to the hopelessly long text which repeatedly puts the article back into the "excessively long SD" tracking category Category:Articles with long short description which I and other editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions are trying to clear out.
Bearing in mind that we shouldn't go above about 40 characters, "Facility for science or technology" seems good, but I'm open to alternative suggestions. MichaelMaggs ( talk) 11:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Workplace for scientific activitywould be OK — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 16:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article seems to focus on chemical labs, or at least labs related to chemistry. There are other places called 'labs' that don't fit the description, e.g. computer labs. I suggest this article be renamed 'Chemistry laboratory' (or 'Laboratory (chemistry)') and 'Laboratory' be made a disambig. What do you think? Ddawson 09:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
G'day all, Unfortunately, I'm not cluey enough to figure out how to make a formal request for a clean-up/collaberative effort etc, however anyone who comes across this message, please tag as appropriate.
In my personal opinion, I think that this should really be a catagory, with the specifics of particular laboratories confined to their own articles. In which case, this article (as it currently stands) would have to be moved to something like "Laboratory_(Chemistry)". Any thoughts?
My particular specialty here is that I work in a Civil Engineering lab, which is so far from what this article (currently) describes, that it almost is insulting to the profession! And as such, there's almost no direction that I can take with regards to incorperating what I know with this article, as it would require an EXTREME re-write. And if that's to occur, then all fields need to be represented otherwise a complete re-write will have to occur again, and again, and again, and again!
Any thoughts out there wikipedians? Cheers -- Sjkebab 12:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me - I haven't done any work on my side of this yet, as I've been on holidays. Although, is "Wet Lab" the correct title? No idea personally... -- Sjkebab 06:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
While I'm not opposed to moving the current article, I do question whether separate articles are warranted. There are thousands of kinds of labs, both "wet" and "dry", corresponding to the many different purposes of individual labs. There is a lot of overlap; for example would an electrochemistry lab be covered by "Laboratory_(Chemistry)" or "Laboratory_(Electronic)"? Articles for each would risk being repetitive and boring. Yet all labs have the common purpose of providing a controlled environment for scientific study. Safety is paramount in all labs, both for the public (harmful agents must be contained, whether biological viruses in a microbiology lab or computer viruses in a malware lab), and for the human occupants (both staff and, in some types of labs, subjects). -- Rick Sidwell 16:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Lab is not always chemical. Physical laboratories may have little or no dangerous chemicals.
Are all not covered properly. Please don't delegate anymore articles out. Sure some we have enough info on to write separate articles but I don't see the possibility a massive outpouring of academic students to flesh out a "Metallurgy lab" article, ever. We need to cover them all with their own section. We need book sources as well.-- I'll bring the food ( Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 04:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was really bothering me. I rewrote it to take a more generic approach and removed the cleanup and globalize templates, replacing them with the expand template (as the article is still incomplete). The material from the old page should probably be incorporated back into this article or into other more specific articles (especially wet laboratory) but I don't have time to do this right now. Maybe I can work on it bit-by-bit later. Hopefully this new article provides a better basis for improvement... -- User:Ajwitte
this song is fast u bye..haha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.47.62 ( talk) 13:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Baho niyo sulat niyo nalang.. xD —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
222.127.219.13 (
talk)
10:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are not in a lab you are forbidden to study with explosives and you are most likely able to get jail time. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.227.222 ( talk) 22:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
-- 222.64.25.74 ( talk) 00:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.64.25.74 ( talk) 00:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know which term is more appropriate
-- 222.64.219.241 ( talk) 00:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.64.219.241 ( talk) 00:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I just created the entry for Reagent bottle. If you have more useful and knowledgeable information, please do add it. Radical Mallard ( talk) 16:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved: insufficient support. DrKiernan ( talk) 09:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Laboratory →
Laboratory (scientific research) – Current name is confusing since laboratory is really a generic name for multiple uses as made clear in the article lead. I see two options. Since this article is mainly focused on research, move it to the
Laboratory (scientific research) of more simply
Laboratory (research). Then create at the main name space a dab page or, as suggested above, a generic article about laboratories in general.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
17:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
I already added some information about history of laboratories. If anyone wants to add more information please do it, but please do not forget to check that the information is from reliable sources. -- Nalatpohn
The beautiful Geneticist Riin Tamm is not wearing properly her protective lab coat in the image... — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenPaulJonas ( talk • contribs) 09:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Is this really necessary? Do I have agreement to remove it? Skullcinema ( talk) 15:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
illustrations for apparatuses 154.229.129.151 ( talk) 03:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
The current short description for this article reads "Facility that provides controlled conditions for scientific or technological research, experiments, and measurement". That's hopelessly long (115 characters as against a maximum of about 40 per WP:SDSHORT). It misunderstands the whole purpose of short descriptions, improperly attempting to define the subject matter, contrary to WP:SDNOTDEF, rather than providing "a very brief indication of the field covered by the article" or "a short descriptive annotation"
I've made two suggestions so far, "Facility for science or technology" (34 characters) and "Facility providing controlled conditions" (40), but have been reverted twice, in each case back to the hopelessly long text which repeatedly puts the article back into the "excessively long SD" tracking category Category:Articles with long short description which I and other editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions are trying to clear out.
Bearing in mind that we shouldn't go above about 40 characters, "Facility for science or technology" seems good, but I'm open to alternative suggestions. MichaelMaggs ( talk) 11:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Workplace for scientific activitywould be OK — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 16:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)