Talk:Liquidmetal

Untitled
Does anyone else think this page feels a lot like advertising boilerplate to them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.186.201.202 (talk • contribs)


 * The alloys themselves are notable, but someone came in and crufted it all up. I'll post a cleanup tag. -- AlexWCovington  (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I just tripped across this article, and I think it's one of the coolest things I've read about in a while. Plastic-moldable metals that don't corrode or scratch and are as hard as steel but lighter? Wow. I don't know how you write an article about that that doesn't sound a little glowing. I really don't see an "ad-like" problem here, and I'm inclined to remove the tag. But if you have something more specific in the cleanup you'd like to see, I'd be happy to take it on. I'd like to see this article become GA actually, I think it's something that readers might find interesting. Maury 03:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think it is particualry like advertising, but the article is very verbose and can be shortened considerably without losing content. The "how-it-works" type information can certainly be condensed, and the whole article should follow the sources more closely and use inline citations. -- Sparkzilla talk! 15:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed the "Terminator 2" trivia. While it is stated in the movie that the "bad Terminator" is made from "liquid metal", this has nothing to do with amorphous alloys or the products of Liquidmetal, which was founded long after the T2 movie. Amorphous alloys open many interesting possibilities, but shapeshifting isn't one of them. Bringing up the T2 is therefore misleading the reader, I'm afraid. George Stobbart 18:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"will bounce three times as long on Liquidmetal" - compared to what? Toxicity of alloys is important. Beryllium, as used in the first alloys, is very toxic. I agree the article is one-sided. Weak points are obviously heat resistance and machineability, but these are papered over or 'being solved'. 84.245.0.98 (talk) 07:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Are these products so important that they need a separate article? I'd suggest merging the article with one on amorphous metals 83.6.207.125 (talk) 19:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * We have pages for "Ford Mustang" that are not merged into "Automobile", and the case here is clearly analogous. The tag is being removed. Maury (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I think having the page is probably important, but almost all of its content would be better suited to being directly included in amorphous metals with this page indicating that Liquidmetal is a line of amorphous metals with the appropriate levels of reference to the university and company. I would also like to see discussion about whether and how these alloys differ from other amorphous metals. If there's no clear distinction, the scope of this article should be greatly reduced, with the possible addition of more detail about the company that shares its product's name. Intchanter (talk) 05:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Sirius Channel
Newly added to the Sirius/XM lineup. Used to be Hard Attack 27. A redirect should be added. Mrmcdonnell (talk) 18:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Apple
Apple recently bought rights to a bunch of the LiquidMetal co's patents; might be a good thing to mention in the article, if anyone knows something about it.Latvahat (talk) 03:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

background
virtually the entire Background is not specific to Liquidmetal. it's about iron. that material should be merged into iron (if not already present) and summarized in this article. 24.24.232.140 (talk) 05:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. It might need a bit more context so people can make the connection, but it clearly explains how amorphous metals work like thermoplastics rather than grained metals. No one should have to read the iron article to get this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkollin (talk • contribs) 02:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The background section is tagged as straying from subject, but I strongly disagree. It serves as a very concise and clear introduction to the concepts that make Liquidmetal special -- and therefore saves the user from the (too often) obligatory foray into the depths of Wikipedia (from which you don't always even return). Thus, it saves the reader time and effort. IMHO, more articles should have a comparable (short but sufficient) introduction. 88.114.128.29 (talk) 12:50, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The background section is off-topic. Most of the section is taken up with a discussion of how alloys solve many problems encountered with elemental metals and how amorphous metals solve some of the problems with "conventional" alloys. Most of that should more properly be elsewhere - in the article on amorphous metals, probably. A concise, abbreviated form in this article outlining the differences between this particular alloy and other amorphous metals would be more to the point. Madgenberyl (talk) 19:48, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Liquidmetal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090131225945/http://coatings.liquidmetal.com:80/our.material.asp to http://coatings.liquidmetal.com/our.material.asp
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/1283186.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18624931.000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Liquidmetal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.liquidmetal.com/applications/defense-applications/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070210043001/http://www.spikedhumor.com:80/articles/80802/Crazy_Liquid_Metal_Material_Shows_Extreme_Elasticity_Features.html to http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/80802/Crazy_Liquid_Metal_Material_Shows_Extreme_Elasticity_Features.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:10, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Liquidmorphium merge
Hi, a merge template was set for Liquidmorphium alloy but I leave my comment on the talk page there not here. This article is general summarisation of the concept and merging here all products is nonsense. Following this logic all mobile phones of all manufacturers ought to be merged in one "mobiles" article. I am against that idea, as this not encyclopaedic approach. Here is explanation of idea and general concept, but to develop system of fair knowledge it should have links to separate articles about particular alloys that are notable either for its qualities or use or anything else making it notable. And all of them ought to have link to here where a concept and eventually a history can be explained with more details. But merging everything here will only limit access to knowledge about separate alloys what is against wiki essential ideas. I add link to this article at Liquidmorphium alloy article. There is no reason to merge Liquidmorphium alloy here, there is fair reason to link here a Liquidmorpium alloy, and perhaps also others if articles about them will be written. This article does not explain them as I have read it ATM, list of names does not explain to much IMHO. This can be good main article, but not the only one about those alloys IMHO. If more discussion is needed please visit Liquidmorphium alloy article. For me that is all about. Ocexyz (talk) 07:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Closed the proposal, given the objection and WP:SILENCE. Klbrain (talk) 17:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 2 years from Ocexyz’s objection, there is still no information available on Liquidmorphium. It was a press release picked up by blogs and news sites. It is made by the same organization; for all we know it is a brand name of one of the published alloy numbers. Liquidmorphium text should be reduced and merged into this article. --Zojj tc 05:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liquidmetal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051206050731/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3618/is_200303/ai_n9214729 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3618/is_200303/ai_n9214729
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.golfweb.com/u/ce/multi/0%2C1977%2C6667479%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:22, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

"Liquidmorphium alloy" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Liquidmorphium alloy. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 11 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Anton.bersh (talk) 13:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Liquidmorphium is also being discussed with this at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 24.  Jay (Talk) 20:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)