User talk:Eb.hoop2
Hello, Eb.hoop2, and
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
- And feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}}
on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 16:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Assume Good Faith
I appreciate your improvements to Cotton Mather, but insinuating that my removal of commentary from the lede was "non-neutral" was inappropriate. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- In reviewing the recent history of edits to that article, I see that the removal of material from the lead that had struck me as potentially non-neutral (in that it took out almost everything that was mentioned there previously which would strike a modern reader as a positive aspect of Mather's career) wasn't carried out by you, but rather previously by original research. Your input on this matter would be appreciated. See also my comment on the contents of the article in the talk page. - Eb.hoop2 (talk) 18:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)]
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
]ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
]Proper source please
The source you added in Triboelectric effect for superradiance is to a news blog, not an actual source about superradiance . Can you please change it, as technically the statement you added is not appropriately sourced at present. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- The source in question is a signed article in Physics World, which is a magazine published by the Institute of Physics. I think that this is more than a "news blog". In any case, the connection with the theory of rotational superradiance is made in the scientific article by Alicki and Jenkins (published in Physical Review Letters in 2020). I just thought that the story in Physics World would be more accessible to a Wikipedia reader. - Eb.hoop2 (talk) 00:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Slight miscommunication. As written the page refers to the Physics World article as the source to explain superradiance, which it is not. The Physics World article would fit with their article, and then a separate source for superradiance.
- N.B., I tried to avoid the masses of popular articles on the topic (including those on the flexoelectric contribution) and give a fair representation of all views, particularly the work which some have ignored. For instance Jamieson's 1910 paper is amazing and disproves so many models that it was ignored until recently. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review
]