User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2014/February

g-factor
Hello, I noticed that the English WP has two articles for the g-factor: G-factor_(physics) and Landé g-factor. As I am not a regular editor anymore, I leave the message here hoping you will know if/how to react.

Best regards, Mathieu Perrin (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fine, the Landé g-factor is one specific example of a G-factor (physics). Both articles mention that and refer to each other. &mdash;&thinsp; H HHIPPO  19:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

MOS
The MOS did not format uncertainties with val, but with ±, so they didn't have mixed fonts. Pushing mixed fonts on the MOS as if there were consensus to do so is inappropriate. The template should comply with the MOS, as it claims to, not the other way around. — kwami (talk) 08:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

%
Don't know if you saw the problem w %. $12.3 %$ and $12.3 %$ (both for 12%) are rather ambiguous, & should probably be formatted like degrees. — kwami (talk) 13:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Simple request
Could you, as the sole author, blank & delete this Template:Infobox element/Print template (db-g7)? It would clean up unused subpages. -DePiep (talk) 06:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not quite unused, but I'll take a look at it this week and see if it's still needed. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * On second thought, never mind. If it bothers me, I'll have to do a clean TfD. This shortcut is not shorter. Let's forget it. ;-) -DePiep (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)