Talk:KATRIN

A fact from KATRIN appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 June 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that KATRIN is an experiment to determine the mass of the neutrino by measuring the energies of electrons given off from the beta decay of tritium?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/June.

Wikipedia

Some of the information in importance doesn't seem to hold a NPOV. - December 3, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.2.88.179 (talk) 15:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add to article?

Why Karlsruhe? The experiment is taking advantage of the tritium production facilities set up there for ITER.
The electron detector, located after the spectrometer tank, was built at the University of Washington in Seattle.

71.41.210.146 (talk) 18:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about citation template usage

@Headbomb: I noticed that you replaced {{cite conference}} with {{cite journal}}. Given that I had just added that, I'm curious to understand whether I made a mistake in the first place. I had understood Template:cite conference to be more specific than Template:cite journal and so preferable if both applied. And since this was a conference presentation, I used {{cite conference}}. Can you help me understand how to use them better? Thank you! 71.41.210.146 (talk) 08:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@71.41.210.146: The choice is somewhat arbitrary, but given that the proceedings are published in a journal (Physics Procedia/ Nuclear Physics B: Proceedings Supplements) I feel it makes a bit more sense to cite those as journals. {{cite conference}} is more designed to cite proceedings published as standalone books. It's not particularly 'wrong' to use {{cite conference}} for this, but from personal experience it's a real pain to track down books compared to journals.

The cite conference parameters are also very prone to not being filled correctly (and this was indeed the case here). For instance |date= is the date the proceedings were published, not the date of the conference, and |location= is the location of the publisher, not the location of the conference. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: ah, okay. So what is the right way to cite a presentation given at a physics conference? For example (and I made the same |date= and |location= errors):

Joo, Kyung Kwang (5 July 2016). Results from RENO and prospects with RENO-50. XXVII International Conference on Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics. London. Video available at Neutrino Conference 2016 - Tuesday (part 1) on YouTube.

There is a corresponding arXiv paper (arXiv:1412.2199), but my source was the video and presentation slides linked above. I find such presentations are often more accessible for Wikipedia-level information. They're both less bogged down in experimental details than the full papers, and the presenters often summarize the field, thus acting as secondary sources, rather than referring to long lists of other papers. (Reliable because they're giving the talk in front of an audience that includes the primary sources they're summarizing, who would jump on them in the question period if they seriously misrepresented something.)

In physics, it's quite common to present significant findings at conferences first, with the arXiv paper following, and then the refereed publication being a relatively unnoticed formality happening months later. (I exaggerate somewhat for rhetorical purposes; referees do commonly catch problems.)

71.41.210.146 (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date of image incorrect

The image's date says:

"25 November 2006 (original upload date) (Original text: 25.11.2006)"

This is obviously incorrect. I can't correct it, though, because I don't know the correct date. McGucket (talk) 14:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]