Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive December 2015
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
WikiProject Optics
FYI, I have nominated WPOptics for merger as a taskforce of WP:Physics, for the proposal, see WT:WikiProject Optics -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 07:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Rainbow Gravity theory
Should this article be named Rainbow Gravity theory or simply Rainbow Gravity? The articles listed at Category:Astrophysics theories do not indicate any consistency. In either case, I think there should be a redirect from one to the other. TJRC (talk) 19:58, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Definitely "theory", although I'm leaning towards pseudoscience... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:47, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Now at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2015_December_17#Rainbow_Gravity_theory. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- As written it reads like pseudoscience. It may eventually be an acceptable article but is not at present. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC).
- Now at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2015_December_17#Rainbow_Gravity_theory. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive August 2015#Rainbow Gravity theory / "Path of Balance Project". JRSpriggs (talk) 02:32, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I say delete it. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:20, 18 December 2015 (UTC).
- See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive August 2015#Rainbow Gravity theory / "Path of Balance Project". JRSpriggs (talk) 02:32, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Seeking expert opinions on top speed claims
It would be helpful to have expert opinions in the discussions at Talk:Dodge Tomahawk#Weasel words: derided by land speed experts and Talk:Dodge Tomahawk#RFC: Word "extraordinary" in lede sentence. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:49, 20 December 2015 (UTC)