Welcome!
editHello, Hfslt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Happy editing! Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi
editHi everyone and Antony–22, I would like to consolidate and clean-up a few nanotechnology articles / templates during the next weeks, thanks for everyones help! Regarding Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Citing_sources I would like to inquire how this is generally handled for Nanotechnology topics as there seem to be many articles with no or poor (journal papers with very few citations) sources, and even fringe topics listed in main overview articles. Furthermore, disambiguations seem to be common place in the literature, perhaps Wikipedia is a good place for streamlining nomenclature. Some articles seem quite outdated and do not pay much attention to new (but established) developments since their creation. Thanks for your feedback on the current consensus in this rapidly growing field, Hfslt (talk) 08:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- First off, thank you so much for putting time into improving these articles. You should take a look at Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines, and see User:Antony-22/Citing academic sources for my own guidance on the subject. The general idea is that it's better to write the article using secondary sources such as reviews and perspectives articles to ensure a balanced treatment of the research. Primary research articles can be cited for more specific details, but by themselves they don't establish notability. Popular science or news sources should not be relied upon for technical facts, but can be used in limited circumstances when discussing opinions and reactions to certain topics. Unreliable "hype" sources should not be used and their text can be removed from the article. Hop all this helps! Let me know if you have any more questions. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 07:28, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback! It has been quite helpful as guideline! I tried with these articles to write them from secondary sources, but also include (many) citations of primary sources due to the necessity to verify single, very specific statements. Let's see what other related articles need improving ... Hfslt (talk) 15:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- Glad to have you here! There is much opportunity for cleaning up these articles, so please continue to improve them as you see fit. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 21:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)