User talk:Duckyplox

Glass

Hi, I noticed your recent contribution to Wikipedia in the article Glass. I've also undone it -- the issue of whether glass is a solid or liquid is one that the article already covers, determining that it's a solid and not a liquid. See also Glass#Glass_versus_a_supercooled_liquid for more information. This doesn't mean your edit is lost forever -- it's still found in the page's history here. At any rate, having your edits changed by someone else is just how things go on Wikipedia. Oh, and welcome to Wikipedia. -- Why Not A Duck 22:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is the research you've referred to (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWhy_Not_A_Duck&action=historysubmit&diff=323603324&oldid=318732370) published anywhere? If so it might be a reliable source (see WP:RS) in which case then it might be worth updating the article. But changing the article based on just an assertion that something is so, isn't how we operate at Wikipedia. -- Why Not A Duck 02:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

General advice on adding information to wikipedia (WP) is to reflect notable (WP:Notability) facts, supported by reliable references (WP:RS), keeping a neutral (WP:NPOV) point of view. The tolerance level varies from article to article, and for glass it is tougher than average. In such cases, if your edits are being reverted, it is a good idea to discuss the proposed changes at the talk page of that article. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]