Talk:Intermolecular forces: Difference between revisions
imported>Chris Day |
imported>Chris Day |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
:No, but I thought that the article was perhaps too physical/mathematical to be of interest to biologists.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 02:30, 12 September 2007 (CDT) | :No, but I thought that the article was perhaps too physical/mathematical to be of interest to biologists.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 02:30, 12 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
::I think you're sending the right message. Gone are the days when biologists can survive with no math. Besides it is | ::I think you're sending the right message that using the physical equations is important to really understand these interactions. Gone are the days when biologists can survive with no math. Besides it is possible to read between the equations. | ||
::On the other hand, despite the fact these are | ::On the other hand, despite the fact these forces are important in biology, there is little reference to biological situations. There should probably be a related article that discusses this from a more biological perspective rather than trying to make this one lose it's focus. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris Day|(talk)]] 02:48, 12 September 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 01:52, 12 September 2007
NOTICE, please do not remove from top of page. | |
I worked on this article on Wikipedia, and intend to maintain and develop it on the Citizendium. | |
Check the history of edits to see who inserted this notice. |
I was in the process of completely rewriting this WP article when I got fed up with WP and decided to stop contributing. I will continue here. --Paul Wormer 06:07, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
Excellent, and welcome!
Notice, we do have to keep that "Article is from Wikipedia?" checkbox checked if there is any content taken from Wikipedia, for which you are not responsible. --Larry Sanger 11:15, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
Finished
I finished this article. Maybe I will change a few details later. At this point in time every word in it is written by me, about 80% for WP and about 20% for CZ. What status number goes with that?--Paul Wormer 10:15, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
I changed it to a 1 on the metadata page. Now you need another editor to take a look at it to work towards approval.. you could try the mailing lists and see what happens. Let me know. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:55, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
workgroups
I just added the biology workgroup. Was there a strong reason for not including it? Chris Day (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
- No, but I thought that the article was perhaps too physical/mathematical to be of interest to biologists.--Paul Wormer 02:30, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
- I think you're sending the right message that using the physical equations is important to really understand these interactions. Gone are the days when biologists can survive with no math. Besides it is possible to read between the equations.
- On the other hand, despite the fact these forces are important in biology, there is little reference to biological situations. There should probably be a related article that discusses this from a more biological perspective rather than trying to make this one lose it's focus. Chris Day (talk) 02:48, 12 September 2007 (CDT)