Talk:Potassium titanyl phosphate

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Prostatectomy#Laser prostate surgery|laser prostate surgery]] The anchor (#Laser prostate surgery) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 10:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

medical use[edit]

Should we not mention or link to more about its medical use in so called 'KTP lasers' eg Endoscopic 532-nm KTP laser excision of inverted papilloma of the nose and paranasal sinuses ? Rod57 (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links appropriate ?[edit]

The external links are to two companies selling PTP products. They do have some (limited) information on the material but nothing that couldn't be referenced as a reference. They are not even industry leading manufacturers so its not clear why they should be singled out as a 'further reading' type of link. Its not clear why links to a commercial supplier are encyclopaedic and I'm not sure if there is much of a public interest in keeping them there. If there are no strong objections I will remove these links. --150.203.48.199 (talk) 23:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry forgot to login before signing... --Fincle (talk) 23:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Figure[edit]

I am happy to provide better figures than the one provided. Is there any preference about the unit cell to use? Cippo1987 (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]