Draft talk:Chemistry of Adhesive Tapes

Is lifetime the main area affected by chemistry? Consider adding two sections: bonding strength and ease of removal.Hagen76 (talk) 18:13, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your second outline is good. The article would really benefit from a section on bonding strength. Hagen76 (talk) 06:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC) Please add an introductory paragraph written for general audiences before the table of contents. The first figure is good, but there needs to be two more figures and a data table, and some of the paragraphs are unfinished. Go through entire article to fix this and to check grammar. Also, there should be at least 8 references. Hagen76 (talk) 19:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Launch! Hagen76 (talk) 19:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

Per a recent redlink addition, I'd point out that standard naming practice here would favour this article ending up at Chemistry of adhesive tapes, rather than The Chemistry of Adhesive Tapes. Some will argue that tapes should be singular (singular names are preferred), but that's grammatically incorrect as this is the singulare tantum "chemistry" as it applies to the range of tapes.

Strictly there's also a policy on writing the article first before redlinking it from a see also, but it would be nit-picking to go into that now.

Thanks for the article, it's a good topic. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Azalin66's comments

Chris: your section looks fine minus a few grammaticals

Spencer: your section looks fine though the figures need to be reorganized and both "Adhesive Degradation" sections need to be merged together

Let me know before noon on Friday if there is anything you'd like me to change in my section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azalin66 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing that I can think of that you might need to add to your section. I think it might be a good idea to talk over my section tomorrow briefly if you have the time.(Phsc42 (talk) 23:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC))[reply]

I think we are good to go! (Azalin66) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azalin66 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]