User talk:Rahman437

Please leave a message. Rahman437 (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rahman437, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Rahman437! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! AmaryllisGardener (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahman437! I'm a fellow classmate in CHM437 and just thought I'd ask you how you're enjoying the course so far (also testing out my Wikipedia editing skills). I like the name you chose by the way. Ramen is so good isn't it? AvatarAang94 (talk) 22:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Rahman437, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help.

I work with the Wiki Education Foundation, and help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment. If there's anything I can do to help with your assignment (or, for that matter, any other aspect of Wikipedia) please feel free to drop me a note. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review CHM437

This is a pretty long and comprehensive article, I assume the outline part is not belong to the draft.

Postive part

I like the history part, it shows the development of the technique, looks interesting.
Great explanation of the mechanism.
Nice referencing

Things to improve

Reference 7 need to a tiny correction, it says check doi. I think the problem is doi:doi:, so delte the extra doi: may help to correct this.
More linking to other relative things to Wikipedia will be better. For example. luminescent and magnetic
Could have better formatting. The application part looks too massive, subheadings may help to have better reading experience.
Better to have some pictures about the probes.

Overall its a nice start, good luck! Cliff310 (talk) 22:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CHM437 Peer Editing Feedback

Positives

Relatively good use of structure with many headings and a table of contents
Great number of references
Excellent amount of detail presented

Points for improvement

consider linking to other parts of wikipedia when you introduce concepts for which there exists another article. For example, you could link to the article about "FRET" or GTP
typo under the history heading "In 1942 'that' diketone complex of..."
Applications section can be broken up into subsections. Consider using bolded headings to introduce each type of application, or groups of applications
Under instrumentation you have bullets, but they are in-line with text rather than taking up their own rows. Personally, I prefer when bullets get their own rows, just as they do in the formatting of my response on the talk page
Again, same goes for numbered list under "Ligands". This would have served to break up the text more and possibly make it easier to read
Pictures would have been really cool! For example you could show some of the instrumentation used in the probes.
The outline at the bottom is interesting as it provides information in an economical way. Consider using more of this style throughout the article and adding more information to it.

Overall a well researched article in progress. It is clear that you put a lot of work into it. Good luck on the final revision!

Thanks a lot Lozmeister (talk) 22:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on your article draft

Nice work on your draft article. I notice that you haven't linked to other Wikipedia articles. Wikilinks are valuable to readers, since they allow them to learn more about the topics discussed in an article. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Additional feedback

Your draft has continued to develop nicely. One thing that could make it a lot better - the image File:Lanthanide_probe_1.jpg. Ideally, images should be displayed at "native" resolution so that browsers can adapt to window size. (On my browser, the image forces the page to scroll, making it all harder to read.) However, when displayed like that, your schema almost disappears. That suggests that the image itself is very small, and I was wondering if you could re-do it, and save it as a larger file. That might make it visible without having to set the image size so large.

Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]