Mayor improvement in wikipedia's thermal/statistical physics articles

In summary, many wiki articles contained horrible mistakes for many years until just a few days ago when I started to edit them. Count Iblis came along and corrected them.
  • #1
1,863
8
Many wiki articles contained horrible mistakes for many years until just a few days ago when I started to edit them. :smile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Helmholtz_free_energy&oldid=212028025" This had been the wiki article since many years. :yuck:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmholtz_free_energy" [Broken]
:smile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fundamental_thermodynamic_relation&oldid=206545149" Utterly flawed statements in that article. Also the correct name is "Fundamental thermodynamic relation" not "combined law of thermodynamics" (the title now shows the corect name because it was later moved by me). :yuck:

Then Count Iblis come along and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_thermodynamic_relation" [Broken] :smile:

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CombinedLawofThermodynamics.html" [Broken] :smile:

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/HelmholtzFreeEnergy.html" [Broken]
:smile:

Some other articles were also corrected by me. So, we can now say that wikipedia has become one of the most reliable sources on thermal and statistical physics on the intnernet. Not least because they were so bad until recently and many other websites had copied them. :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well done count! :cool:

It's too bad that the nature of wiki articles allow for such errors to occur at all, much less to be cited! :yuck:
 
  • #3
robertm said:
Well done count! :cool:

It's too bad that the nature of wiki articles allow for such errors to occur at all, much less to be cited! :yuck:

I'm going to raise this problem at the wiki policy sections. I think that the policies of wikipedia do not work well for the core scientific topics. They stress that everything must be cited and discorage what they call "original research". But this has had the effect that people simply wrote nonsense and gave a link to a few textbooks. Nothing was discussed because well, we aren't supposed to discuss the fundamentals we just write what is in the sources.
 

1. How can we improve the accuracy of thermal and statistical physics articles on Wikipedia?

One way to improve the accuracy of these articles is to ensure that all information is backed up by reliable sources. This includes peer-reviewed scientific papers, textbooks, and reputable websites. Editors should also carefully fact-check and verify any information before adding it to the article.

2. What steps can be taken to make these articles more accessible to non-experts?

In order to make these articles more accessible to non-experts, it is important to use clear and concise language, avoid jargon and technical terms whenever possible, and provide helpful explanations and examples. Additionally, including relevant images and diagrams can also aid in understanding for those who may not be familiar with the subject matter.

3. How can we ensure that these articles are up-to-date and reflect the latest advancements in the field?

To ensure that these articles are up-to-date, editors should regularly monitor and update the information based on new research and developments in the field. This can also be achieved by collaborating with experts in the field and incorporating their knowledge and insights into the articles.

4. Is it important to have a diverse range of perspectives and viewpoints represented in these articles?

Yes, it is important to have a diverse range of perspectives and viewpoints represented in these articles. This can help to avoid bias and provide a more well-rounded and comprehensive understanding of the topic. Editors should strive to include information from different sources and viewpoints, as long as it is supported by reliable evidence.

5. How can we encourage more contributions and engagement from the scientific community in improving these articles?

One way to encourage more contributions and engagement from the scientific community is to actively reach out to experts and invite them to contribute to the articles. This can also be achieved by creating a welcoming and inclusive environment for collaboration, providing clear guidelines and instructions for contributing, and recognizing and acknowledging the contributions of scientists and researchers in the articles.

Suggested for: Mayor improvement in wikipedia's thermal/statistical physics articles

Back
Top