Wikipedia:Peer review/Timeline of the Universe/archive1

Timeline of the Universe

 * ''The article in question has since been merged into Timeline of the Big Bang.

Pre-electroweak epoch
Just a minor point, somewhere I think it should be made clear that the electroweak transition represents the current limit of the physics we can experimentally verify using particle accelerators. Our ideas of what happens before that are at best educated guesses.


 * Tjopau 13:28, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You're right
I'll get it updated soon. I've been sick (danged flu) lately. Ah I love spring. -- Zalasur 03:54, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

New Update
I kinda like new updates to discussion pages to be at the top. I have no idea why Wiki likes them at the bottom. Just my preference. :)

Anyways I'm fixing up the article by including new references. I merged Timeline of cosmological eras to Timeline of the Universe on request. I copied over as much data as possible and padded it out a bit. Then, I uncerimoniously redicted the whole page over. C'est la vie. No one updated it in a while so I'll just, um, move it over. ahem.

More references are a'coming. Going to merge from other articles on similar subjects and coordinate with more detailed subjects like Timeline of the Big Bang. Taking a look at the article shows me that the two have a lot of overlapping data. Oh well, moore research is required...

Anyways I'm now going to mop up formatting issues. It's getting more readable now. When I get the initial comments on peer review I'll see about getting a fresh review and then pushing for featured article status. It might take a month.

-- Zalasur 00:31, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC) (I hate forgetting the four tildes)

Original request
There are several reasons for nominating this one for peer review. I'd like this article to get "Featured Article" status (mostly to help blow my ego to unimaginable proportions). But, it needs work:


 * 1) The dates and timeline should be verified for scientific accuracy
 * 2) Though I'm not particularly religious myself, I'd like to include some references to "Biblical Timeline" and related stuff, or at least a link to an article that talks specificly about that stuff
 * 3) More pictures...? I'm hunting around. Fortunately NASA's archive of awesome insterstallar and intergalactic pictures is quite extensive, and in the public domain. But I need to find relavent pictures related to the TImeline of the Universe, not just "pictures". For example the picture of the whirlpool galaxy was chosen because it's undergoing massively visible star formation right now (even highlighted in the convenient subset), and star formation is a key feature of the Stelliferous Era.
 * 4) Critique on the style of the article. For some reason relying on a purely bulleted style of writing, though convenent and logical for timeline documenting purposes, annoys me for some reason. Readability could be improved there...

The article has been dead for a while and needed some desperate overhauling, and no one's raised any objections yet. But also, no one's made any comments either. Come on, help a guy out! :)

Send me your thoughts, whatever they are.

-- Zalasur 17:38, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)


 * For starters, this needs proper references. Lead is too short and should be at least doubled. I can see the reason for bullets, but no you can remove one level of bulleting (i.e. the first major point does not have to be bulleted). Some headings are empty (they containt just more subheadings), this looks bad. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:19, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree here, and I thank you for the detailed critique. Since I'm working this week I'll won't be able to make corrections to the layout except for very slowly.  I have online references that I've been using (I'll start putting those in this week too), but I'd like the hard-cover variety  of references as well.  It's too bad all my books are still packed up from my last move.  ;)  -- Zalasur 19:53, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)