Talk:Madison Symmetric Torus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dave 16:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) I have added the info box and hte picture.
Dave 17:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC) The style of this page could be wikipedia-ized but the RFP page needs to be fixed first
[edit] How to make a toroidal pinch section??
Okay, this section's either got to go or be really redone. Definitely not worded like an encyclopedia article. More like a kids' book... Just my 2c, of course. Kind of looks like it was copied/pasted from somewhere else then reformatted for WP... But I could be wrong. Mgmirkin 20:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Advertising?
Seems like the first section and several subsequent sections are worded almost like advertising propaganda, trying to expound the virtues of this particular implementation over similar competing implementations. I don't think that really has a place in WP. In fact I'm pretty sure it's relatively Verboten (forbidden) by WP:Vanity, WP:NPOV among other rules? Should probably be reworded to maintain neutrality and conform to standard encyclopedic wordings. It would also be nice if citations would be utilized. I've created a References section, so if people could cite using the < ref > < /ref > tags, it's ready to go (though it looks weird not having any citations yet). Thx. Mgmirkin 20:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Ohh yeah, and the logos in the second or third section seem really advertise-y, and are probably copyrighted...? The layout with two logos right next to each other kind of looks like something a kid might put on their personal website, with flashy, move-y animations that are a bit distracting, and probably shouldn't really be in an encyclopedia article. Just because they're used as logos for the project doesn't mean they need to be included in a relatively scientific article. They're quite peripheral to the overall gist of the article. I think it would be fairly uncontroversial to drop one or both of them. There's no rule that every available piece of information needs to be used in an article. These could probably be dropped to reduce the overall length and improve readability. Mgmirkin 20:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Magnetic Fluctuations in the RFP?
"The most common way a plasma distorts the confining field is by driving periodic waves along it. These fluctuations were entirely unexpected in the early days of fusion research. To see why, imagine you're standing over a riot shouting rude remarks like "Packers suck! Cleveland rules!" driving the riot to a fevered pitch. Now imagine that out of this random cauldron of chaotic motion a parade should spontaneously break out, every member marching in lock step."
The above seems like completely non-encyclopedic tripe of the kind someone might find in a kids' book. Aside rfom that it's confusing. I'm not sure wht the reference to a parade breaking out really has to do with plasma confinement fields. This should probably be reworded in a more standard fashion. Let's try just describing what actually happens in physical terms? Somehow it just looks liek a lot of this was copied and pasted from a kid-friendly company/institutional PR website or something... No offense. Just doesn't really seem encyclopedic, and even seems a bit insulting to the audience. Mgmirkin 20:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
