This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ionization article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
According to Dissociation (chemistry): "[dissociation] is frequently confused with ionization." But neither article explains the difference. Please reply at Talk:Dissociation (chemistry) Eleland 02:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know why ionization is spelt with a 'z' when the expected form would be 'ionisation' and 'ionise'? This doesn't appear to be a regional difference as all textbooks that I have seen use the spelling listed in the article. Zebulin ( talk) 00:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It does not matter whether you spell ionise or ionised with a z or s. My dictionary says that the spelling with an s is more common in British English. In Scientific articles, either spelling is allowed, although the z variant seems to be used more often. I guess the important thing is to only use one of the two variants in the article. AJH.
The American version is spelt with a 'z' and the English version is spelt with a 's'.
Institute of Physics publications (in Great Britain) want "z"s in every "-zation". I presume because it matches the pronunciation and is easier for foreign readers to pronounce correctly. 76.212.128.2 ( talk) 01:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Isn't this article the right place to explain how the ions are produced in an FID? Is ionization during a chemical reaction called chemical ionization? – Rainald62 ( talk) 21:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment: The dot for element 85 At is missing from the graph for those of you who are studying this in detail. 76.212.128.2 ( talk) 01:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
It is my understanding the ionization is largely a quantum mechanical effect. I feel like the section on classical ionization should be renamed to "Classical Model of Ionization". I also feel that sequential ionization should be put underneath the quantum ionization section because plenty of ionization models (ADK, PPT) treat only the problem of sequential ionization and they are in no way classical models.
I also think the section titled quantum ionization about be better described by Photoionization (includes tunneling, mulitphoton, ATI, and any other ionization model that is due to electromagnetic waves).
Do you think it is reasonable to include a section on collisional ionization and chaotic ionization?
Lukealanjohnson ( talk) 05:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I have an air filter with a fan or a fan/ion switch. Is it inappropriate to ask for such a layperson explanation here?
Virillustre (
talk)
05:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Ionization. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I removed this primary source Egodapitiya, K. N.; Sharma, S.; Hasan, A.; Laforge, A. C.; Madison, D. H.; Moshammer, R.; Schulz, M. (2011). "Manipulating Atomic Fragmentation Processes by Controlling the Projectile Coherence". Physical Review Letters. 106 (15). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.153202. ISSN 0031-9007. Revert of IP edit here: [1]. It doesn't seem to fit in this general article. Also, IP suggests potential WP:COI. -- Kkmurray ( talk) 01:48, 10 December 2015 (UTC)