Talk:Johannes Diderik van der Waals/Draft: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Stephen Ewen (comment on footnotes v. Biblio) |
imported>Kim van der Linde |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
::::In-article footnotes would be for works you are relying on to craft the article, I'd think. The Bibliography subpage here could contain all of JDvdW's works plus whatever relevant scholarly work about him you deem fitting. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 05:24, 20 October 2007 (CDT) | ::::In-article footnotes would be for works you are relying on to craft the article, I'd think. The Bibliography subpage here could contain all of JDvdW's works plus whatever relevant scholarly work about him you deem fitting. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 05:24, 20 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::::I can see the value of the references to the actual articles, but it can also be done by referring to the bibliography. I agree with you to include the sources that were used for making this article. [[User:Kim van der Linde|Kim van der Linde]] 15:54, 22 October 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 14:54, 22 October 2007
Approval nomination
I'm no scientist but in my reading this clearly needs to be nominated for approval. —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 14:11, 1 October 2007 (CDT)
- I agree. I made some minor changes, and I wonder if it would be possible to add references to the major works of him, so that people actually can find those if they want. I moved some stuff to subpages, and I need some definitions of terms in the related articles section, which could use probably a few more. Kim van der Linde 07:05, 19 October 2007 (CDT)
- I added a few references to Van der Waals' major works and their translations.--Paul Wormer 08:40, 19 October 2007 (CDT)
- I added references to the bibliography subpage, almost simultaneously with Kim adding the same references as footnotes to the main text. (It is most likely no coincidence that we added the same references, I got them from the site of the Dutch Academy and I bet Kim did the same). Now the question is, do we keep both sets of references? Or do we keep one? If the latter which one: footnotes or bibliography? Is there a CZ policy on this?--Paul Wormer 03:55, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
- In-article footnotes would be for works you are relying on to craft the article, I'd think. The Bibliography subpage here could contain all of JDvdW's works plus whatever relevant scholarly work about him you deem fitting. Stephen Ewen 05:24, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
- I can see the value of the references to the actual articles, but it can also be done by referring to the bibliography. I agree with you to include the sources that were used for making this article. Kim van der Linde 15:54, 22 October 2007 (CDT)
Categories:
- Article with Definition
- Nonstub Articles
- Advanced Articles
- Internal Articles
- Physics Nonstub Articles
- Physics Advanced Articles
- Physics Internal Articles
- Chemistry Nonstub Articles
- Chemistry Advanced Articles
- Chemistry Internal Articles
- History Nonstub Articles
- History Advanced Articles
- History Internal Articles
- History tag