User talk:R123J456/Static fatigue

Peer Review
Hi! I really believe you've greatly improved your wikipedia article so far. The readability is much better and a lot more understandable. You do really well at simplifying the material while still adding necessary content. I was wondering whether or not you decided to delete the metal embrittlement part and kinetics part as they were not copied over into your sandbox. I do believe that both sections are important, but some parts (especially the kinetics part) could use some edits to improve readability. If you decide to take out both sections though then make sure they're also deleted from the lead. I also think that the lead could be a bit more concise and shortened. Lastly, the wikipedia article keeps referring to figures, although I don't see any images. I do think images would improve the quality of the article, and should be added if possible. Veryhappybubbles! (talk) 22:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, Veryhappybubbles! Thank you for your suggestions. I redacted the metal embrittlement and kinetics parts because there were no sources to back them up even after my search. I've removed the any mention of metals in the article from the lead and the article as a whole because the relation between metals and static fatigue are minimal or vague. Some sources even mention that fatigue in metals differ from the static fatigue in glass and ceramics. I cannot find a way to shorten the lead considering that the article in itself is really short. I do not know where I would move it. Since I already removed the metal embrittlement and kinetics sections, there's no need to worry about the missing figures. I will try to add other suitable images for the article if there are any. Thank you again! R123J456 (talk) 00:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)