Talk:Thermodynamics: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
imported>Milton Beychok m (→Requesting reviews: Response to Daniel) |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
::Didn't have a closer look yet but in general, if there is sufficient material (as in this case), I would think it is better to have a separate article rather than a section in another one with a broader scope. This would also facilitate interlinking of the concepts, as well as approval of the individual articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC) | ::Didn't have a closer look yet but in general, if there is sufficient material (as in this case), I would think it is better to have a separate article rather than a section in another one with a broader scope. This would also facilitate interlinking of the concepts, as well as approval of the individual articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::You've convinced me. I have gone ahead and merged parts of this article into [[Laws of Thermodynamics]] to upgrade it somewhat as a separate article. It still could use a good bit more work. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:50, 10 October 2009
Requesting reviews
I think this article was originally a port from WP, but not sure. In any event, I just made a number of changes such as re-ordering the sections and formatting changes without making any changes in content.
I would like to ask that Paul Wormer, Daniel Mietchen, David Volk and any others with thermodynamics expertise review this article and make whatever revisions are needed to start it down the road for approval. Please! Milton Beychok 17:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- Two further points: (a) Does this article need a section on non-equilibrium thermodynamics? (b) Thermodynamics has links to Laws of thermodynamics ... but when I go to Laws of Thermodynamics, I find it to be an almost useless stub of an article. Is the much better "Laws of thermodynamics" section of Thermodynamics inclusive enough for me to ask for speedy deletion of the useless Laws of thermodynamics stub? Milton Beychok 19:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't have a closer look yet but in general, if there is sufficient material (as in this case), I would think it is better to have a separate article rather than a section in another one with a broader scope. This would also facilitate interlinking of the concepts, as well as approval of the individual articles. --Daniel Mietchen 23:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- You've convinced me. I have gone ahead and merged parts of this article into Laws of Thermodynamics to upgrade it somewhat as a separate article. It still could use a good bit more work. Milton Beychok 05:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Categories:
- Article with Definition
- Developing Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Physics Developing Articles
- Physics Nonstub Articles
- Physics Internal Articles
- Chemistry Developing Articles
- Chemistry Nonstub Articles
- Chemistry Internal Articles
- Engineering Developing Articles
- Engineering Nonstub Articles
- Engineering Internal Articles
- Chemical Engineering tag