Talk:Cauchy–Born rule: Difference between revisions
TimothyRias (talk | contribs) assess |
→References should be reworked: new section |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Stub| |
||
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
==Removed link== |
==Removed link== |
||
I just removed the link [http://www.mis.mpg.de/calendar/conferences/2002/quasiconvexity2002.html Quasiconvexity and its applications], since this is a link to a 2002 conference, which doesn't appear to have any actual material on Quasiconvexity, let alone the Cauchy-Born rule. --[[User:Joth|Joth]] ([[User talk:Joth|talk]]) 14:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
I just removed the link [http://www.mis.mpg.de/calendar/conferences/2002/quasiconvexity2002.html Quasiconvexity and its applications], since this is a link to a 2002 conference, which doesn't appear to have any actual material on Quasiconvexity, let alone the Cauchy-Born rule. --[[User:Joth|Joth]] ([[User talk:Joth|talk]]) 14:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
== References should be reworked == |
|||
I recently added a precision of the rule based on the description by Pitteri and Zanzotto (see the page for full reference). Sorry for leaving the page in this state of using two different citation styles, but I don't have the time right now to modify and check all the other sources so they all use the inline style. (Which i think is the preferred way of doing it, right?) If nobody has the time, I might come back to it later, but I am really not so good at writing, so I am hoping someone else can do it. [[User:Shelthome|Shelthome]] ([[User talk:Shelthome|talk]]) 13:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 13:31, 3 December 2024
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Removed link
[edit]I just removed the link Quasiconvexity and its applications, since this is a link to a 2002 conference, which doesn't appear to have any actual material on Quasiconvexity, let alone the Cauchy-Born rule. --Joth (talk) 14:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
References should be reworked
[edit]I recently added a precision of the rule based on the description by Pitteri and Zanzotto (see the page for full reference). Sorry for leaving the page in this state of using two different citation styles, but I don't have the time right now to modify and check all the other sources so they all use the inline style. (Which i think is the preferred way of doing it, right?) If nobody has the time, I might come back to it later, but I am really not so good at writing, so I am hoping someone else can do it. Shelthome (talk) 13:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)