Talk:Electron orbital: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Paul Wormer
(Atomic orbital in WP)
 
imported>Chris Day
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
== Atomic orbital in WP ==
== Atomic orbital in WP ==


Before starting this, I looked at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital AO in WP]. What an incredibly bad article! A total mess. It started as a reasonably good article in September 2001 (6 years ago). About 500 edits later by 157 (I counted) different people (and a few bots) the article is a complete tragedy. People are still "improving" it, last edit was on October 6, 2007. This is the best example of WP's weakness I have encountered so far. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 09:19, 8 October 2007 (CDT)
Before starting this, I looked at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital AO in WP]. What an incredibly bad article! A total mess. It started as a reasonably good article in September 2001 (6 years ago). About 500 edits later by 157 (I counted) different people (and a few bots) the article is a complete tragedy. People are still "improving" it, last edit was on October 6, 2007. This is the best example of WP's weakness I have encountered so far. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 09:19, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 09:38, 8 October 2007

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Quantum mechanical quadratically integrable one-electron function (function of the coordinates of one electron) [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories Chemistry and Physics [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Atomic orbital in WP

Before starting this, I looked at AO in WP. What an incredibly bad article! A total mess. It started as a reasonably good article in September 2001 (6 years ago). About 500 edits later by 157 (I counted) different people (and a few bots) the article is a complete tragedy. People are still "improving" it, last edit was on October 6, 2007. This is the best example of WP's weakness I have encountered so far. --Paul Wormer 09:19, 8 October 2007 (CDT)