This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
On second thoughts I think that Ref #3 should be removed altogether until there is evidence that the journal is one in good standing, that all 30 authors from different institutions have given their consent for their names to be included as authors in the reference and that those persons even exist. Until that is done the article should be declined. Are IPs allowed to create articles? See Research paper mill. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:36, 19 August 2024 (UTC).Reply
To clarify, it is a genuine journal in good standing. This is one of those "let's get together and do a concensus review" papers. Legit. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Comment: This article cited too few sources. Especially concerning is the fact that it lacks citations for the modern aspects of the topic when such citations are easily found (like http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.03.002). Also, it would be nice if you could add images depicting how this process works. Pygos (talk) 05:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Comment: I agree with the comments that this article should be improved with an image or two, more material and more citations. However, the approach is highly cited and continues to be so. There is therefore no question of notability. I am going to accept it, but then tag it as needing expansion. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have reverted deletion of a reference with multiple authors. It is completely valid, the Journal of Alloys and Compounds is well established in metallurgy and materials science. It was previously the Journal of Less Common Metals and dates back to 1958. Invited reviews of a field like this are not uncommon; they are an alternative to special issues. I actually read the article in question, and there is nothing wrong with it; the topic is on the edge of my expertise as a grey haired materials scientist. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
