Milestone-Proposal talk:Czochralski: Difference between revisions
(→-- ~~~~: new section) |
Allisonmarsh (talk | contribs) (→More of the story -- ~~~~: new section) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The Czochralski method of Crystal Growth definitely deserves the IEEE Milestone, and the proposal is well put together and substantiated. It would benefit from adding few extra commas, spaces, checking for typos (Jason found one) and possibly numbering the plagues in the section describing the security of the sites. | The Czochralski method of Crystal Growth definitely deserves the IEEE Milestone, and the proposal is well put together and substantiated. It would benefit from adding few extra commas, spaces, checking for typos (Jason found one) and possibly numbering the plagues in the section describing the security of the sites. | ||
== More of the story -- [[User:Allisonmarsh|Allisonmarsh]] ([[User talk:Allisonmarsh|talk]]) 17:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC) == | |||
Wikipedia calls it the Czochralski Process. Is there any consensus on whether it is a process or a method? | |||
As many of you know, I generally don't like naming individuals in plaques because the plaque is supposed to honor the technological achievement, not the person. However, in this case the achievement has become eponymous with the person, so I have no problem with it. | |||
For the average, non-engineer passerby, I really like the story about how he accidentally made the discovery. I think the citation could also benefit from describing more of the applications and why this is so important. | |||
Revision as of 17:51, 2 March 2018
Milestone Citation -- Jason.k.hui (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
In the last sentence of the citation, should the last word "eletronics" be "electronics"?
-- JaninA (talk) 00:24, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
The Czochralski method of Crystal Growth definitely deserves the IEEE Milestone, and the proposal is well put together and substantiated. It would benefit from adding few extra commas, spaces, checking for typos (Jason found one) and possibly numbering the plagues in the section describing the security of the sites.
More of the story -- Allisonmarsh (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia calls it the Czochralski Process. Is there any consensus on whether it is a process or a method?
As many of you know, I generally don't like naming individuals in plaques because the plaque is supposed to honor the technological achievement, not the person. However, in this case the achievement has become eponymous with the person, so I have no problem with it.
For the average, non-engineer passerby, I really like the story about how he accidentally made the discovery. I think the citation could also benefit from describing more of the applications and why this is so important.
