Talk:Multipartite entanglement

I am interested in this subject area but I found the article confusing because it uses too many technical terms that are not explained. I some cases it links to articles that do not exist and probably never will exist such as "separable and entangled states" in the first sentence. Such terms are closely tied to the subject matter of this article and need to be explained here. There are also links to words like concurrence but wikipedia only has an article about this as a legal term.

On the other hand it seems to miss some obvious links to related articles such as "Quantum entanglement" Weburbia (talk) 11:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this article is obviously not in optimal shape right now. it looks like a cut and paste job. Mct mht (talk) 19:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this article is total crap. Just from the first definition that is so wrong 89.3.212.183 (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article was copied from Quantiki.org. This is fine, as Quantiki is a wiki licensed under the GPL. However, the Quantiki article shouldn't be cited as it is merely a wiki itself. Either reputable published sources should be cited (textbooks or journal articles) or nothing should be cited at all. However, it good to note where the material originated from on this discussion page. Njerseyguy (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Geometric measure of entanglement into Multipartite entanglement

Not enough content for this article to stand on its own, and feels like a topic that shouldn't have its own article. The proposed merge target is the only article linking to it. This merger was recommended at [[1]]. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 16:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Such technical topics are not well-served by a standalone article. In Multipartite entanglement it can be put into proper context, as it is already mentioned together with other entanglement measures. Also, the article has been essentially abandoned since creation, in Multipartite entanglement it has a better chance of being properly maintained. Tercer (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I concur with the above evaluation. To put it a little loosely, we organize our material based on what things are, rather than what they're called; there's a distinction between an encyclopedia and a technical glossary. XOR'easter (talk) 19:25, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Since nobody has commented in more than a week, I've gone ahead and implemented the merge. XOR'easter (talk) 21:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]