Talk:Disk laser
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, Srleffler; something wromg with citations.. I try to understand, what is the matter. dima 09:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] combine with active mirror?
I know how to improve the citations. I do it.
By the way, how about to combine this article with active mirror?
dima 09:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Since active mirror seems to be just an earlier name for a disk laser, the contents of that article should be merged here, and that article should be replaced with a redirect to here. Wikipedia articles are organized by thing, not by name. Each thing gets one article (normally), regardless of how many names it has.
- By the way, is the title spelled correctly? The normal spelling for the geometric figure is "disc", not "disk". Floppy disks are an exception to normal English spelling.--Srleffler 05:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
C O M B I N E D !!! dima 14:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Institute for Laser Science
Mein Gott, the articles Institute for Laser Science and Laboratory of Laser Energetic are not yet at Wiki??? Or I again misspell the names? dima 09:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Laboratory for Laser Energetics has an article.--Srleffler 05:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks, Srleffler!
Hi, Srleffler. I got your smile. Thank you.
I try to arrange links before to combine the articles.
I corrected the links to the institutes you mention.
The spelling of the disk is not so easy: in some publicaitons it appears as disk, in some as disc. Perhaps, we should mention both spellings. dima 14:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] formatting
It seems, some non-ascii character in the references instead of - (separator in indication of pages) causes a conflict with math expression, if appear in the same paragraph; this leads to the wrong formatting; which appears after to save, and is not seen at the preview. I just replaced this character, and now the paragraph looks much better. Is it only at my conputer, or other users see the same? dima 03:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
The problem with formulas disappeared, but now some problem with Fig.1. Since today, it appears as {?] in the article. Is it because of the license, of because of the format, or a wikibug? I have converted it to jpg,
,
it seems to work, but now some formulas appear as [?], Now previous versions also do not look better... What is the matter?
dima 03:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)