Talk:Glassy state

I observe some dispute about this article but have not found any discussion. It seems to have considerable merit and the recent redirect to Vitreous does not seem an improvement. I shall therefore revert. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. This article has no merit whatsoever. This article as well as physics of glass have been tolerated far too long by desperate editors who just wanted to keep User:Logger9 out of the article glass (similarly, phase transformations in solids and kinetic theory of solids were tolerated to keep him out of phase transition). Much of the material that constitutes this article has been inserted not only here, but also in several other articles. This is obviously unencyclopedic; links should be used instead. The very first section, on "viscosity of simple liquids", is obviously off topic. The 50-odd unsorted references are valueless dump. Therefore I replace this article once again by a redirect, and I urge the community to deal with the harmful edits by Logger9 in a coherent way. -- Paula Pilcher (talk) 17:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, for a start this is one individual's personal essay and secondly this material is repeated elsewhere, a redirect to Glass is the most appropriate cause of action. Polyamorph (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article Glassy state was redirected months ago (by me) on March 15 2009. No objections were made by the creator of the article Logger9 at the time as consensus was (see talk:Glass) that the article Physics of glass be created. It does not make sense for this article to exist as it is more or less a duplicate of Physics of glass. I thereby re redirect this article to glass and strongly urge that in future editors check before reverting actions that were made months ago by established editors. Polyamorph (talk) 20:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]