Talk:Nature

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nature has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.

Article milestones

Date Process Result

September 13, 2006 Peer review Reviewed

December 4, 2006 Peer review Reviewed

January 7, 2007 Good article nominee Listed

March 22, 2008 Peer review Reviewed

September 27, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept

Current Status: Good article

 This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Physics      (Rated GA-Class)

Physics portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Version 1.0 Editorial Team     (Rated GA-Class)

This article's quality and importance have been assessed.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Additional information:

GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale. Feel free to make short comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

This article is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This article is a vital article.

This article is one of the core set of articles every encyclopedia should have.

[edit] I have removed the claim on "matter can be converted into energy" and its related contents

Special Relativity never claim that matter can be converted into energy. Instead, it suggests that mass and energy are identical or mass is a form of energy. Mass is identical to energy if you define mass as relativistic mass. If you define mass as the rest mass, it is a form of energy. Either definition is applicable in Physics. See Special relativity and mass in special relativity. Annihilation is just a process that particles are destroyed and there are particles to be created at the same time in the way that energy, momentum and charge are conserved. To be precise, Physicists don't use the term matter, instead they talk about "mass", "energy" and "particles". See matter. Thljcl (talk) 01:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Misuse of 'nature' and 'natural'

Articles on wikipedia such as natural skin care are misusing this term to mean 'non-artificial', 'non-manmade', etc. concepts applying to things which occured in nature without human contribution or design. I feel this is inaccurate. Is there a term that can be suggested for them to use? Obviously they don't want non-artificial or anything with a no/non prefix but rather something neutral and positive or something. Like 'left' rather than 'non-right'. Tyciol (talk) 21:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)