This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I hesitated to create a trivia section (a dubious practice at best) for the single item about
Tom Lehrer's show "The Physical Revue".
And still more sadly, reviewing the first 100 of "about 600" Google hits on
offered no instances of them in the same sentence. I had hoped for evidence that the clever bit about "reading physical review" meaning looking at the "pictorial" articles in Playboy was more than a passing amusement between two grad students, or within one department. Anyone?
--
Jerzy•
t
15:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Physical Review X is a sad joke. Nothing but an expensive vanity press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.131.203 ( talk) 05:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I hesitated to create a trivia section (a dubious practice at best) for the single item about
Tom Lehrer's show "The Physical Revue".
And still more sadly, reviewing the first 100 of "about 600" Google hits on
offered no instances of them in the same sentence. I had hoped for evidence that the clever bit about "reading physical review" meaning looking at the "pictorial" articles in Playboy was more than a passing amusement between two grad students, or within one department. Anyone?
--
Jerzy•
t
15:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Physical Review X is a sad joke. Nothing but an expensive vanity press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.131.203 ( talk) 05:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)