![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should I nominate Propagation of light in non-inertial reference frames for WP:PROD? It does not seem to be a topic, per se. — Quondum 21:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Project-independent quality assessments. This proposes support for quality assessment at the article level, recorded in {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and inherited by the wikiproject banners. However, wikiprojects that prefer to use custom approaches to quality assessment can continue to do so. Aymatth2 ( talk) 20:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity., a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
08:44, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
X-ray crystallography has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Atomic theory has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:14, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
If others could chime it at Talk:Plum_pudding_model#Example_of_damaging_false_and_misleading_information, that would be much appreciated. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
I tagged this new article with Template:Expert needed. The sources currently cited in the article don't appear to include the term axial current. Is the content legit? — Alalch E. 17:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Electricity has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 00:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Albert Einstein has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 18:06, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Universe has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Artem.G ( talk) 18:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should I nominate Propagation of light in non-inertial reference frames for WP:PROD? It does not seem to be a topic, per se. — Quondum 21:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Project-independent quality assessments. This proposes support for quality assessment at the article level, recorded in {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and inherited by the wikiproject banners. However, wikiprojects that prefer to use custom approaches to quality assessment can continue to do so. Aymatth2 ( talk) 20:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity., a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
08:44, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
X-ray crystallography has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Atomic theory has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:14, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
If others could chime it at Talk:Plum_pudding_model#Example_of_damaging_false_and_misleading_information, that would be much appreciated. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 13:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
I tagged this new article with Template:Expert needed. The sources currently cited in the article don't appear to include the term axial current. Is the content legit? — Alalch E. 17:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Electricity has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 00:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Albert Einstein has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 18:06, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Universe has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Artem.G ( talk) 18:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)