Talk:Laser pointer
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Laser pointer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Denmark goalkeeper targeted by green laser pen during European Championship semi final
editThis article was edited anonymously from IP 152.115.67. 134 on Thursday 8 July as follows:
"English Football fans favor (sic) the green color (sic), as it as (sic) somewhat camouflaged against the green pitch, but when in the eyes of the opposing team, it still annoys them".
This coincided with a statement from UEFA, the governing body of European Football, that it would be taking action against the English Football Association in response to an incident during the European Championship semifinal between England and Denmark. It was reported (and there is supporting photographic evidence) that Denmark goalkeeper Kaspar Schmeichel had been targeted with a green laser pen as the England captain Harry Kane was preparing to take a penalty kick. There is no evidence to support the claim that a green laser pen is the favourite tool of England football supporters to distract and annoy opposing teams. I have therefore deleted the speculative comment and replaced it with a factual account. Rebecca Shaw 23:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think this is too trivial to mention here. WP:RECENT and WP:NOTNEWS may have relevant guidance, though I haven't read them closely and recently so I don't guarantee it supports my position. Anyway I've removed the mention; if someone disagrees, please let's discuss it here. --Trovatore (talk) 06:26, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- I suppose I added rules might be reasonable additions to the article, but the one specific incident doesn't seem needed. Is the action taken as part of a specific rule regarding laser use, or generally on, for example, fan interference? Gah4 (talk) 08:30, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- It could fit with examples of football fan violence on some other page as it was widely reported and witnessed by millions. It could then have a link from here as an example of misuse. Brian R Hunter (talk) 09:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- I suppose I added rules might be reasonable additions to the article, but the one specific incident doesn't seem needed. Is the action taken as part of a specific rule regarding laser use, or generally on, for example, fan interference? Gah4 (talk) 08:30, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Picture caption: Rayleigh scattering?!
edit> Note that the beam itself is visible through Rayleigh scattering.
While I don't doubt there generally being some Rayleigh scattering, in free air, close to somewhere large plants grow, with loads of large-scale brighter dots: That's gotta be very much dominantly scattering on dust, which is not Rayleigh scattering.
Is there some indication of it being primarily Rayleigh scattering? I'm adding a [citation needed], but it'd be nice if someone could debunk either my or the original author's theory. Marcusmueller ettus (talk) 16:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- On second thought, I just removed that claim. The primary source cited in the text does specifically say it's not solely Rayleigh scattering making beams visible, and the current caption suggested it was. Marcusmueller ettus (talk) 16:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)