Talk:Crystallographic image processing

I don't think there is anything wrong with this article. From the style differences, one can still tell that it has been written by several authors over time. More detailed discussions that are backed up by a long list of references make a lot of sense to scientists - that is actually what they are looking for in any review article. Sure the general public is not interested in science at the active research scientist level, so what? Worst cause of action would be to water a good article down because a professional wikipedia editor thinks the general public has a problem with this article? Kind regards, Peter Moeck, Professor of Physics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.175.148 (talk) 02:12, 17 August 2016 (UTC)