From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

I concur to this. While cute, there are hundreds of compounds more relevant than the book. Nergaal ( talk)
I like it but if it is not necessary we can delet it.-- Stone ( talk) 17:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete it. Gary King ( talk) 17:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Deleted!-- Stone ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Gary King ( talk) 21:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC) reply

The prose needs to be better. Shouldn't "that has the symbol" be "that is represented by the symbol"? "was (incorrectly) suggested" – The brackets are unnecessary. Please give the entire article a run-through. Gary King ( talk) 22:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Will try my bes tomorrow.-- Stone ( talk) 22:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Tried to improve, but still ..... -- Stone ( talk) 21:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Is it ready for me to take another look, or do you want more time? Gary King ( talk) 21:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Will call for help at the Elements project! And than I will be back.-- Stone ( talk) 22:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Now it got a complete workover and I think it is OK now, please have a look.-- Stone ( talk) 06:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Gary King ( talk) 16:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

  • There are a lot of small paragraphs. Can you merge them (logically) so that they flow better?
  • Can you narrow down the number of images in the article? Free images are good, yes, but sometimes it's possible to go overboard with too many. Choose the ones that are most appropriate, and the rest can be left to a link to a Commons page. All four images in the gallery, for instance, is that necessary?

Gary King ( talk) 19:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Merged several of the small paragraphes and reduced the number of images! Now better? The gallery was really a little to much. -- Stone ( talk) 20:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Okay passing Gary King ( talk) 20:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

I concur to this. While cute, there are hundreds of compounds more relevant than the book. Nergaal ( talk)
I like it but if it is not necessary we can delet it.-- Stone ( talk) 17:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete it. Gary King ( talk) 17:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Deleted!-- Stone ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Gary King ( talk) 21:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC) reply

The prose needs to be better. Shouldn't "that has the symbol" be "that is represented by the symbol"? "was (incorrectly) suggested" – The brackets are unnecessary. Please give the entire article a run-through. Gary King ( talk) 22:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Will try my bes tomorrow.-- Stone ( talk) 22:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply
Tried to improve, but still ..... -- Stone ( talk) 21:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Is it ready for me to take another look, or do you want more time? Gary King ( talk) 21:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Will call for help at the Elements project! And than I will be back.-- Stone ( talk) 22:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC) reply
Now it got a complete workover and I think it is OK now, please have a look.-- Stone ( talk) 06:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Gary King ( talk) 16:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

  • There are a lot of small paragraphs. Can you merge them (logically) so that they flow better?
  • Can you narrow down the number of images in the article? Free images are good, yes, but sometimes it's possible to go overboard with too many. Choose the ones that are most appropriate, and the rest can be left to a link to a Commons page. All four images in the gallery, for instance, is that necessary?

Gary King ( talk) 19:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Merged several of the small paragraphes and reduced the number of images! Now better? The gallery was really a little to much. -- Stone ( talk) 20:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Okay passing Gary King ( talk) 20:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook