The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I would be interested in your comments on
Draft:Fiveling; there do not seem to be many active material scientists. I am still waiting for a couple of images from people before moving forward with a final version.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 05:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Very nice work @
Ldm1954. I will read it in details ASAP. If you feel like nominating the article to a GA, please do and I will review it by the end of April. I’m sure it will pass with some minor comments. Thanks for writing such a detailed article.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
a very superficial look into a really excellent article
... or a five-fold twin is a type of twinned particle should it be "
twinned crystal".Y
(They also observed single crys .., remove the bracket. Y
(see later), make an internal link using #, as you did with large volumes -- see also Ybelow.
cite some sources to avoid
WP:weasel (as you did in different parts) for
While most of the details of the formation of fiveling nanoparticles are now understood,Y
Many papers have suggested possible links to heterogeneous catalysts.Y
In crystals the strains can be slightly different, the full details of which are still being debated., here it helps the reader (including myself) to find more detailsY text was changed
No experimental evidence has been found for this process.Y I removed the sentence
The figure labelled Atomistic simulation of disclination movement in decahedral particles, showing .. can be made bigger.Y
, hence the question of what is that you asking? Avoid editorialising as per
MOS:EDITORIAL, the next sentence need sourcing if it is not from the Berry and Wales work. Y
similar to While there are similarities, they are not the same and quasicrystals are now considered to be different from fivelings and the related icosahedral structures.Y
Further reading section might be worth it and will compliment the External links section. I will think about this one. Off hand there is nothing that is not already in the article. I may add in later weeks/months.
there is a space at the end of "See also" sectionY
Do we need a section for Formation at the micro-scale (more than 100 nanometres), see
this exampleY It is in there, since the drawing from Rose is (probably) mm in size, and the photograph of the gold particle later is 0.5cm. Multiple sources say that they just grow larger and are metastable (already mentioned and cited), we can't say more because transforming a mm size fiveling to a single crystal has never occurred.
How about a section about their effect: given my background, I understand they have a profound effect on the (micro)mechanical properties, e.g.,
1 and
2. I added a bit, but I think it is a bit of a digression. In the process of hunting I found
Nanomechanics which needs major work, no refs
last thing, the article name, it seems that "five-fold twin" is used widely than Fiveling. See
WP:COMMONNAME There are too many names! Fiveling was the original one, so I will stay with that. There are redirects
PS: it is really intimidating to review the work of someone with your in-depth knowledge about the topic. You have a a significant scientific phenomena named after you! so my review will be mostly about how we can get more from you :). Thank you for work.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 10:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for all your suggestions, most of which I have incorporated. I just moved it to main space, and will add some links. I want to wait a week before doing a GA nomination, but I do think that is appropriate.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 00:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
nice work, do not forget to expand the lead
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 09:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Lead expanded, and GA nomination done (why not).
Ldm1954 (
talk) 06:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
if it is not review by the end of May, I will give it go. Bit busy these days..
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 20:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No problem. I will be in vacation May 30-June 25 so it might need to be later.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 20:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Please feel free to challenge any of the following comments
for note a and b, remove the bolding for words, as per
MOS:NOBOLD. You can use single quote or {{
em|...}} if you want to emphasise.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Yreply
(optional) for the first mention of "Marks decahedron" in the lead, can you please reference that using this reference
Oxford Chemistry or
Oxford Chemistry just to avoid any comments about COI especially that I do not see you have worked with Jonathan Doye, as these notes are used to teach postgraduate students. Feel free to choose any other text book source.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Y I added both the original naming and the book (thesis) you mentioned.reply
The last image in the article, there is a scale bar, can you add the value of that scale bar to the caption please.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Yreply
(optional) for image "Atomistic simulation of disclination movement in decahedral particles ..." see if you want to change the length to 300px (currently the width is 300px).
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Y I compromised by making it 362x250reply
use dmy and Use American English template at the top of the page, near the description.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Y, although it is "Use" not tq.reply
remove wikilink for "re referred to as a type of cyclic twins where.."Y The twin pages are less detailed than here, so now they link fivelings to this page.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.