User talk:Vexedd

Helium
Anything you have to say about helium should be added to the helium article. Why do you insist on trying to create content forks? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * RHaworth, the article on helium is entirely descriptive, in very close parallel to the article on hydrogen. In that case, all explanation of the quantum mechanical solutions to the Schroedinger equation for hydrogen are on a separate page, hydrogen atom, and the more technical aspects of the solutions are offloaded to a third page, hydrogen-like atom.  Deleting the user for developing an article on their own user page seems excessive here!  If you believe that the technical material on using the variational method, density functional theory, and the Hartree-Fock method to approximate solutions of the Schroedinger equation for helium should be folded into the helium article, then that's fine -- but it's hard to do it unless somebody undeletes User:Vexedd.
 * Perhaps you should also enforce the same injunction on the hydrogen atom and hydrogen-like atom pages. Robin (talk) 21:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. You are allowed a separate helium atom article. I have done the basic things that you should have done: giving it proper capitalisation and adding an heading to distinguish it from the helium article. Now you can create the link to it from helium! &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Your courtesy and fairness are sincerely appreciated! (Vexedd is a junior researcher working for me, and is on the steep bit of the Wikipedia learning curve -- I'm grateful for the forgiveness of mistakes).  I'll make sure the link from helium gets made. Robin (talk) 22:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)