Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Accuracy disputes: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Scientific29 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Scientific29 (talk | contribs) this has been cleared up - appropriate citations now present |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
*[[Uranium trioxide]] |
*[[Uranium trioxide]] |
||
*[[noble metal]] -- there have been a lot of changes made recently, principally by a single editor. On balance, I think the article is better now than before. Still, there are no web-verifiable citations that demonstrate that the scope of the list of noble-metals is correct -- just citations to books which most Wikipedians can't access. And some of the article appears to be potential [[WP:OR|original research]] I think the article could use the eyes of a few chemists or metallurgists on it. 20:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC) |
*[[noble metal]] -- there have been a lot of changes made recently, principally by a single editor. On balance, I think the article is better now than before. Still, there are no web-verifiable citations that demonstrate that the scope of the list of noble-metals is correct -- just citations to books which most Wikipedians can't access. And some of the article appears to be potential [[WP:OR|original research]] I think the article could use the eyes of a few chemists or metallurgists on it. 20:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
*[[Calcium carbonate]] - an IP recently made major changes to a set of data in a table - see [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Calcium_carbonate&curid=44731&diff=314772466&oldid=311275590 this diff]. In an attempt to identify whether this was justified or blatant vandalism I looked for refs but found that with the exception of one section - on the uses of calcium carbonate - the article is virtually devoid of citations. Please can someone with access to suitable sources add sufficient citations to make the article look more like an encylopedic entry and less like someone's [[WP:OR]]? Thanks -- [[User:Timberframe|Timberframe]] ([[User talk:Timberframe|talk]]) 19:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 06:31, 30 August 2010
- Depleted uranium
- Uranium trioxide
- noble metal -- there have been a lot of changes made recently, principally by a single editor. On balance, I think the article is better now than before. Still, there are no web-verifiable citations that demonstrate that the scope of the list of noble-metals is correct -- just citations to books which most Wikipedians can't access. And some of the article appears to be potential original research I think the article could use the eyes of a few chemists or metallurgists on it. 20:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)