User talk:Magggey/Nanobiomechanics

This is super cool! Good find! I'm excited to see what improvements you make. :) Cs4652 (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm a fan of all your proposed changes. You're really going to help beef this article up! A few thoughts: 1. you mention nanoindentation and cite one study specifically. I think that's a great start. The one thing I wonder though is whether Wikipedia will like that. Just because they tend to focus on review papers rather than on individual studies. Can you find other examples where the same methodology was used? Then you could give a general description about how different studies have used the same technique and cite both sources. It would make it more general. If not though, I think it's fine just how you have it. I maybe would just not start the paragraph saying "Tai et al." I would generally describe the technique and cite where you learned it. 2. ignorant question: What's AFM? I assume you're going to type it out once in the actual article and this is just a short-hand version to trigger your memory yah? :) 3. the information about potential applications of these techniques is super cool. Technology is just awesome. Overall, I think you have some solid plans here. What figure are you going to include? There are just so many options! I'm excited to see what you do. Cs4652 (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I think the outline you have is really great! Lots of interesting points are made, and I think it definitely improves on the methods and instrumentation section. It looks really solid and I don't really see anything to improve. There are a few spots that could have some difficulty once they're turned into an actual article, so here are a couple of suggestions of things to make sure you do (you already do these at least a little in the outline though): 1. Define the techniques. I'm guessing you'll just use links to other Wikipedia articles on the subject, but make sure you do that:) 2. Explain how the technique is used to study nanobiomechanics. For example, you mention that nanoparticles are embedded on the surface of structures. Make sure there's a brief description of how the technique is actually used. 3. Say what information the technique can give. For example, I liked how you mentioned that nanoindentation can look at the deformability of the tissue so that it's clear how the technique is helpful. Examples like that keep the technique relevant. One other thing to consider is that maybe some of the information listed could go on another page. For example, AFM has a small section titled "Biological applications and other" on its Wikipedia page, so maybe some information could be more beneficial there? Just an idea! Dinoboy10 (talk) 05:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes! Absolutely. That sounds like a lot of work. But it would sure help to clarify your article and make the ideas more concrete and easier to digest. That's always a good thing especially when your topic is as complex as it is. Cs4652 (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! All of this is super helpful. I forgot to post this sooner, but I beefed up the old outline into more of an article than the bullet points with transitions. I tried to hit your comments as well. If you have further suggestions, I always appreciate it. Magggey (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It looks pretty good! I don't really have any suggestions, nice job! Dinoboy10 (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)