|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the M-theory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|M-theory has been listed as a level-5 vital article in Science, Physics. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as FA-Class.|
|M-theory is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 22, 2015.|
|Current status: Featured article|
|WikiProject Physics||(Rated FA-class, Top-importance)|
- This review is transcluded from Talk:M-theory/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hello, and I am Vinethemonkey. I shall review this article. Let's begin!
Grammar and ErrorsEdit
Skimming through the article, I see no obvious grammar and spelling errors. Check thoroughly to make sure that grammar and spelling is correct.
Number of citations are good.
Citation #67 is only a commentary. Please check, and add a reference to it or delete the citation.
Also, a couple of the citations go back all the way to late 1970s. Would this be technically "out of date"? Check this out.
Is it Understandable?Edit
My answer here is: Yes.
Indeed, there are a number of pictures that adequately suit the article. Some may need a citation (I might be wrong; confirm this).
However, I do doubt the matrix picture is necessary. Please check that out, and respond if you do or do not need it.
Also, can you say how the tessellation is related to the M-Theory in the captions?
I will wait for you to do the following:
- Check grammar and spelling thoroughly.
- Check citation #67.
- Check to make sure that the citations are NOT out of date.
- Check out the picture of the definition of a matrix.
- Check out the tessellation caption.
Confirm these, and respond. I will keep watch of this page. It may take anywhere from 1 day to 1 week for me to respond back.
Thank you Vinethemonkey for this helpful review. I have made changes to the article in response to your comments:
- 1. I ran a spell check, and everything seems to be spelled correctly. I'll keep an eye out for any grammar mistakes.
- 2. I have added a reference to an article of Randall and Sundrum in citation #67.
- 3. I reviewed the citations to older articles, and everything should be okay. I cited these older papers in the history section merely to give the original references. The statements in this section are also supported by Duff's 1998 article.
- 4. According to WP:WHYCITE, citations are expected in the image captions as in the rest of the article. In this case, it seems to me that the statements in the captions are all supported either by the main text or the file page. Please let me know if there's any particular caption that you feel requires a citation.
- 5. I originally included the matrix picture so that readers with less knowledge of mathematics could understand. I have now removed the picture, but I would be interested in hearing others' thoughts on this.
- 6. I explained more precisely the connection to M-theory in one of the captions in the section on AdS/CFT.
- Thanks for the response, Polytope24, for the response. Most of these problems seem to be cleared up. In response to #5, we can see what the public opinion is about the matrix picture.