Talk:Lab-on-a-chip
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Japanese company
[edit]Isn't there a Japanese company that is building a plant for making nitroglycerine using LOC stuff since it is a lot easier to dissipate the heat of the exothermic reaction needed to create it due to the large surface to volume ratio? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MyNameHere (talk • contribs)
External links
[edit]Please review WP:EL before adding more links or reverting to the massive pile that were there before. Links should be encyclopedic, not to companies or research groups. That is, they should contain information about the lab on a chip, not about someone selling labs on chips. The EL section should be kept to a minimum, and the old section was longer than the article itself. WLU (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps we can trim it down a bit. Deleting all of them is overzealous though. Anyone else have an opinion here?--Cubic Hour (talk) 18:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Doubtful as it's a fairly low traffic page. You could seek a WP:3O if you'd like. Based on WP:EL, what is your rational for keeping so many? In particular, the pages for the research groups seem unusual - they don't really add information about the subject matter. External links should be kept to a minimum, and should add information that the page itself, were it a feature article, could not contain because of copyright restrictions or large multimedia files. Also consider which links should be used as either generic references, or the preferred use of in-line citaitons. Finally, there are now books placed in the external links section, but they are unlinked. They are more appropriately placed in the further reading section. I had moved them before but your undo, I'll replace them. As a last point, per WP:MOS, the external link section should be called external links, not external information. I'll be removing manufacturers from the list - they would be considered WP:SPAM. The only time that a link to a manufacturer or commercial site is appropriate as an EL is when it's the wikipage of the company itself. WLU (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- See Talk:Microfluidics. Let's keep the discussion there, since it's basically the same conversation about a related field.--Cubic Hour (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Doubtful as it's a fairly low traffic page. You could seek a WP:3O if you'd like. Based on WP:EL, what is your rational for keeping so many? In particular, the pages for the research groups seem unusual - they don't really add information about the subject matter. External links should be kept to a minimum, and should add information that the page itself, were it a feature article, could not contain because of copyright restrictions or large multimedia files. Also consider which links should be used as either generic references, or the preferred use of in-line citaitons. Finally, there are now books placed in the external links section, but they are unlinked. They are more appropriately placed in the further reading section. I had moved them before but your undo, I'll replace them. As a last point, per WP:MOS, the external link section should be called external links, not external information. I'll be removing manufacturers from the list - they would be considered WP:SPAM. The only time that a link to a manufacturer or commercial site is appropriate as an EL is when it's the wikipage of the company itself. WLU (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)