Knowledge (XXG)

:Peer review/Nuclear clock/archive1 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

154:
reader to qualify for B-grade. It's difficult for someone steeped in the literature enough to write the article to judge, so a separate reviewer's opinion would be valuable. (I'm pretty sure the other B-grade criteria are already met, but feel free to comment on those too, if you like.)
200:
The final few sentences of the lead section (about the suitability of thorium-229m) are confusing in isolation; the lead doesn't make it clear why energy or laser excitation are relevant. The following section expands on this, but in general, lead sections should stand on their
208:
throughout the article. I fixed one of these myself, but many of them I'm not familiar enough with the subject to be able to elegantly rephrase the sentences. Some examples: "it is also intriguing", "it is evident", and
195:
Overall, I think it does a good job of being accessible to non-technical readers; as someone not particularly familiar with physics or chemistry, I felt it was a pretty easy read. A few suggestions for improvement:
243: 212:
The end of the ionization section mentions "the loss is tolerable", which left me wondering what "tolerable" means in this context and should probably be expanded on.
253: 76: 126: 156: 122: 107: 69: 238: 99: 248: 50: 150:
I've listed this article for peer review to get feedback on whether the article is sufficiently accessible to a non-
62: 160: 17: 220: 205: 171: 151: 44: 224: 183: 179: 164: 216: 115: 175: 232: 92: 141: 134: 103: 70: 8: 77: 63: 32: 244:Engineering and technology peer reviews 204:There seem to be several violations of 35: 7: 254:Current peer reviews pending closure 24: 1: 191:Comments from Cryolophosaur 18:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review 270: 225:04:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC) 184:18:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC) 165:18:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC) 170:(Created on behalf of 239:May 2024 peer reviews 249:Current peer reviews 172:User:97.102.205.224 142:Watch peer review 87: 86: 261: 139: 130: 111: 79: 72: 65: 47: 33: 269: 268: 264: 263: 262: 260: 259: 258: 229: 228: 193: 145: 120: 97: 91: 83: 51:Manual of Style 43: 31: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 267: 265: 257: 256: 251: 246: 241: 231: 230: 214: 213: 210: 209:"fortunately". 202: 192: 189: 188: 187: 157:97.102.205.224 148: 147: 146: 144: 90: 85: 84: 82: 81: 74: 67: 59: 56: 55: 54: 53: 48: 38: 37: 30: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 266: 255: 252: 250: 247: 245: 242: 240: 237: 236: 234: 227: 226: 222: 218: 217:Cryolophosaur 211: 207: 203: 199: 198: 197: 190: 185: 181: 177: 173: 169: 168: 167: 166: 162: 158: 153: 143: 138: 137: 133: 128: 124: 119: 118: 114: 109: 105: 101: 96: 95: 89: 88: 80: 75: 73: 68: 66: 61: 60: 58: 57: 52: 49: 46: 45:Copying check 42: 41: 40: 39: 34: 29: 28:Nuclear clock 26: 19: 215: 206:WP:EDITORIAL 194: 152:WP:TECHNICAL 149: 135: 131: 117:Article talk 116: 112: 93: 27: 176:Tutwakhamoe 104:visual edit 233:Categories 127:history 108:history 94:Article 36:Toolbox 136:Watch 16:< 221:talk 201:own. 180:talk 161:talk 123:edit 100:edit 174:by 235:: 223:) 182:) 163:) 140:• 125:| 106:| 102:| 219:( 186:) 178:( 159:( 132:· 129:) 121:( 113:· 110:) 98:( 78:e 71:t 64:v

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Peer review
Nuclear clock
Copying check
Manual of Style
v
t
e
Article
edit
visual edit
history
Article talk
edit
history
Watch
Watch peer review
WP:TECHNICAL
97.102.205.224
talk
18:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
User:97.102.205.224
Tutwakhamoe
talk
18:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:EDITORIAL
Cryolophosaur
talk
04:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Categories
May 2024 peer reviews

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.