This is an archive of past discussions with User:Antony-22. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thanks for the suggestions! I do think High-resolution transmission electron microscopy is high-quality and nanotechnology-specific enough for the portal. I'm less familiar with electron microscopy than scanning probe microscopy, so I'd like to know more about nanotechnology-specific uses of the former. I think the current "scanning probe microscopy" section of the navbox could be broadened but it should be done in a sensible way. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
The TEM and HRTEM are used in material sciences to see single atoms (e.g. carbon atoms in graphite; DOI:10.1126/science.1166999), but on the other side there are biological nanomachines (e.g. ribosomes), which can be vitrified and examined by TEM/HRTEM. The images of these biological complexes (of RNA or protein or both) are processed (Single particle analysis) and if the final 3D structure or tomogram is obtained, it is uploaded to EM Data Bank (like PDB for X-ray and NMR structures; ribosomes in EMDB). I guess, that SEM and TEM (and STEM) are used extensively in material science, but have no experience with that. Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Cool! If you had to pick only one or two articles that are the most nanotechnology-specific to go in the navbox, which would you pick? Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 17:14, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
I would say Electron microscope: the most general, though B-class. As I am biased, I would also suggest TEM as the 2nd article, though SEM/STEM and EFTEM are widely used as well. You could put it next to AFM and STM (and call the whole section "Microscopy"), as these techniques "see" things. On the other hand, the photon-microscopy (e.g. X-ray microscopes and Sub-diffraction limit techniques: e.g. STED microscopy) can reach the resolution of the tens of nanometers as well. Lastly, the state-of-the-art free-electron lasers are being built or optimized to resolve even smaller features with harder X-rays, but that is still in the future. Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I was at the Kogod Courtyard for the DC meetup to day promptly at 3:00pm. I didn't see any group that seemed to be the Wikipedians. One group had a sign "meetup" but it was the DC Philosophy Club. Anbothe was a photographer's group. Where was everyone? was this canceled? DES(talk)00:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Moving files from En.Wikipedia to Commons is a tedious task. For your hard work in moving quality images to Commons and for your long term dedication to the project, I hereby award you this Move to Commons Barnstar. Thanks for your work and keep it up! Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 15:47, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
You realize, if we have enough information about crossings at a particular location, we need to move the information to a separate article, right? - Denimadept (talk) 23:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Participate in discussion about Media Viewer follow-up study
I'm contacting you because of your involvement in the Media Viewer RfC. I understand that this is a bit awkward since the RfC has closed with consensus, but I have been tasked with helping the Multimedia team run a study to gather more feedback about Media Viewer preferences. I think the the write-up for the study could use your feedback. Would you take some time to review the study and share your thoughts on the talk page? Please feel free to invite others to participate as well. Thank you! --Halfak (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
On 9 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Navy Annex, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that occupants of the Navy Annex finally left after the food service was stopped and the ATM removed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Navy Annex. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
comprehensive scientific concepts
Thank you for the courage to let us understand scientific concepts comprehensively, for example DNA nanotechnology, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Hi! This is Dcrjsr (Jane Richardson). I noticed one of your proposed projects is a page on Protein structure determination, which is indeed very much needed. I've had something similar on my wish list for a while, but would want to make it more general as Macromolecular structure determination. One hard part is settling on the best hierarchy -- is there a general page on molecular structure determination? Definitely the crystallography page is almost entirely on small molecules, which are important but currently perhaps less so than biological macromolecules. So should the main organization be by molecular type (small; protein; DNA; RNA; carbohydrates; ...) or by technique (crystallography; NMR; cryoEM; SAXS; prediction; ...) or some other system. Anyhow, at present it seems a shame to do proteins without including nucleic acids (especially RNA and protein/nucleic acid complexes). I don't know the answer -- what are your feelings?
In any case, I'd be interested in helping whenever you get started with it. Dcrjsr (talk) 00:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Antony-22! One of my co-workers at Cato has recently realized that her boss's wikipedia entry is very wrong, to the point that it says he doesn't even work there anymore. They'd like the intro updated to give his current title at Cato and say that he formerly worked where it (wrongly) says he currently works. We both have a clear COI (since she works for him directly), but we think this is a fairly simple change. She's posted a request on his talk page, but hasn't gotten any replies. Can you help us out here? We want to be completely above board on this. Thanks! HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:14, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Yep. No one had replied for a few days, so I went ahead and reached out to a few people. Thanks for checking up on it!! Hope you're doing well. HistoricMN44 (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Antony-22. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
