Talk:Surface diffusion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Surface diffusion has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on December 5, 2007.
December 8, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
WikiProject Chemistry
Chemistry Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, which collaborates on Chemistry and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of December 5, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Yes, but the lead should be longer. Please, add the second paragraph.
2. Factually accurate?: Yes
3. Broad in coverage?: Yes
4. Neutral point of view?: No problem
5. Article stability? Stable
6. Images?: Ok

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— Ruslik (talk) 08:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


I'll try to get the second paragraph in at some point today. Runningamok19 (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually meant something more than two sentences. Please, make lead consist of two really long paragraphs. Ruslik (talk) 06:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I've added a bit more to the first paragraph, not sure if it's what you are looking for. If I think of more useful, concise, additions I can make I will do so. Runningamok19 (talk) 15:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Now it looks much better. Ruslik (talk) 19:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts about what hadn't been mentioned was some of "the obvious". e.g., involves solids. (you made the point about 10% of mpoint but not sure this is obvious for new readers in the intro. Are they always crystals/metals? Involves differing atoms? (or how can you see the diffusion). Applies to CVD and PVD? Does this read back to "old" technologies like nitriding? Just some thoughts Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Math notation cleanup

Don't write this:

\Gamma\, << \nu\,

Instead write this:

\Gamma \ll \nu\,

Don't write this:

< \Delta r^2 > \,

Instead write this:

\langle \Delta r^2 \rangle \,

I've fixed these in the article. All such cleanups should be finished before this is declared a Good Article. Michael Hardy (talk) 15:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] image

I tried to see how I could improve the article. Difficult! However the diagram below uses a\ modified imagemap to label the illustration. Any advice? This I think also labels the start position more clearly. Move your cursor over the diagram... Victuallers (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] imagemap

The source for an imagemap based on this diagram is stored here Victuallers 21:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


Start location each time - and finish for (5) (1) a single jump down (2) a diagonal jump (down and to the right) (3) a double jump (to the right) (4) a triple jump (to the right) use button to enlarge or use cursor to identify

Figure 6. Various jumps may take place on a square lattice such as the fcc (100) plane. 1) Single jump; 2) Diagonal jump; 3) Double jump; 4) Triple jump; 5) Rebound jump (atom ends up in same place it started). Non-nearest-neighbor jumps typically take place with greater frequency at higher temperatures. Not to scale
Figure 6. Various jumps may take place on a square lattice such as the fcc (100) plane. 1) Single jump; 2) Diagonal jump; 3) Double jump; 4) Triple jump; 5) Rebound jump (atom ends up in same place it started). Non-nearest-neighbor jumps typically take place with greater frequency at higher temperatures. Not to scale
That might be a little over-crowded - it'd be easier if the balls in the end positions were partially transparent. Adam Cuerden talk 04:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Adam ... didn't quite understand your comment. I'm guessing you saw this as a new diagram. In fact the diagram is only a modification/enhancement and I think had been added before your comment. If you run your cursor over the picture then you will see. Hope I have not misunderstood. Victuallers (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Aye, I know it's not new, but I still think it'd be a bit clearer if the starting point wasn't the same for five different processes - it gets very crowded, and can be hard to follow. Not one of your best works, I fear. Adam Cuerden talk 20:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, maybe if you fixed the arrow for 2, so it wasn't mostly covered, that might help. They already are slightly transparent, but perhaps could be a little moreAdam Cuerden talk 20:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Well thrilled that you think that this one of "my best works" but no. I have only added the imagemap to Runningamok19 artwork. I agree that the weakish point of the diag is the common starting point but thats why I add the imagemap as its a difficult concept to do in one static diagram. Hopefully is improved. Victuallers (talk) 21:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree the image could use a little work. Will upload an improved version tomorrow. Runningamok19 (talk) 04:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

(1) start for horizontal jumps (2) a single jump (3) a double jump (4) a triple jump (5) a quadruple jump (6) start for diagonal jump (7) a diagonal jump (down and to the right) (8) a rebound jump use button to enlarge or cursor to identify

Figure 6. Surface diffusion jump mechanisms. Diagram of various jumps that may take place on a square lattice such as the fcc (100) plane. 1) Pink atom shown making jumps of various length to locations 2-5; 6) Green atom makes diagonal jump to location 7; 8) Grey atom makes rebound jump (atom ends up in same place it started). Non-nearest-neighbor jumps typically take place with greater frequency at higher temperatures. Not to scale.
Figure 6. Surface diffusion jump mechanisms. Diagram of various jumps that may take place on a square lattice such as the fcc (100) plane. 1) Pink atom shown making jumps of various length to locations 2-5; 6) Green atom makes diagonal jump to location 7; 8) Grey atom makes rebound jump (atom ends up in same place it started). Non-nearest-neighbor jumps typically take place with greater frequency at higher temperatures. Not to scale.

How does the new image look? Runningamok19 (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Pleased to see you are using the tool (I guess). Suggest that green are called 1 and 2 again and the rebound is also 1. See what Adam thinks. Oh and major contratulations on the GA. I'm jealous! Victuallers (talk) 18:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! For the time being, I am going to add the image as-is since it is at least somewhat of an improvement. Runningamok19 (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)