Difference between revisions of "Talk:Nanotechnology"
(is it true? is it useful?) |
JeanJacques (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:No one here has rights. We only have an obligation to share truthful and useful information. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:22, 12 November 2008 (EST) | :No one here has rights. We only have an obligation to share truthful and useful information. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:22, 12 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | I'm not a physicist, and my only resource is wiki, which is in and of itself, not saying much, but wiki does seem to accept that these are two quite standard ways of making nano tech. "top down" and "bottom up" are even the words they use. I won't change anything, as I'm distrustful of wiki as a source.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 10:47, 12 November 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 15:47, November 12, 2008
I don't understand why you reverted my edit. The article has a stub at the end asking users to expand it. I did.
Reversion of JohnD edits
I don't see what was wrong with them, other than a reference not being provided. Why shouldn't they be restored since they were removed without explanation?. --DinsdaleP 09:57, 12 November 2008 (EST)
I can't speak for Ed Poor, but I'm guessing the only reason this was reverted was the lack of reference. Whenever yyou edit, please try to cite credible sources. Thanks. --Ben Talk 10:12, 12 November 2008 (EST)
- This doesn't make sense: "The 'Top Down' method involves taking a larger object and removing parts to create a smaller structure similar to creating a statue from a block of stone." If I had inadvertently deleted correct information, he ought to have explained why it was correct. Instead, he implied that the stub template gave him a 'right' to edit.
- No one here has rights. We only have an obligation to share truthful and useful information. --Ed Poor Talk 10:22, 12 November 2008 (EST)
I'm not a physicist, and my only resource is wiki, which is in and of itself, not saying much, but wiki does seem to accept that these are two quite standard ways of making nano tech. "top down" and "bottom up" are even the words they use. I won't change anything, as I'm distrustful of wiki as a source.--JeanJacques 10:47, 12 November 2008 (EST)