Talk:KLOE (experiment)

Untitled

While I won't pretend to fully understand what KLOE does, the section "KLOE and the Nobel Prize" could use some structure, as right now, the section jumps from discussing experiments to detailing the shape of KLOE, to describing the computer attached to KLOE, to discussing once again the shape, and then concluding with the technical abilities of KLOE. The jumbled topics make the information hard to absorb.

Perhaps you could separate the topics into their own paragraphs with spacing in-between, or add relevant headings to provide some guidance to the reader?

Also, some of the sentences are incomplete. For example, you say "the electromagnetic calorimeter had a 4.5 meters and a diameter of 4 meters."

All the best!-Keiradams (talk) 02:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

This is fair. I separated the Nobel Prize section and used line breaks to separate the experiment from the detector and the specs by which part of the detector they describe. I moved the section on the goals of the detector to become a transition segment between the experiment and the detector. I also corrected the typo, though I'm not seeing others. The computer is an important component of the detector though. Without it, we wouldn't be able to detect anything at all. ;) Thank you very much for this! It was very helpful! Penrose Delta (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review: Victoria Constant Not sure how relevant a lot of the details in the KLOE and the Nobel Prize section are–maybe I'm not well versed enough to see what is relevant but it seems like a lot of specific details for Wikipedia. Also, I think you need more sources–we are supposed to have 10 secondary sources this time, so add some just in case so points don't get taken off for it.

Otherwise, your writing is clear and direct and sounds very Wikipedian. Overall, good job! :) Vconstant (talk) 04:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe? It's an article on the detector and the experiment since they are, for the most part, one and the same. Physicists refer to them pretty interchangeably, so I figure giving the more general specifics of the detector is important. I left out a lot of the really specific stuff, but I'm not sure what else would be ideally taken out. Thank you for the reminder about sources. I wrote on the φ meson last time, so I'm not 100% sure if that applies to me, but I've emailed all the TAs to check in case I'm wrong. Thank you so much! :) Penrose Delta (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Penrose Delta. Peer reviewers: Keiradams, Vconstant.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)