Talk:Pearlite

There are two important remarks on the article about pearlite: 1. Bainite is NOT a phase! 2. Theory of bainite formation by a displacive process has received a lot of criticism and is probably incorrect (e.g. papers of Aaronsons). ok

Well this should be explained more

Reference

It looks like this article may have been copied from the following website (or vice versa):

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://image.absoluteastronomy.com/images/encyclopediaimages/p/ph/phase_diag_iron_carbon.png&imgrefurl=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Pearlite&h=278&w=300&sz=31&tbnid=_xc40iKr5fUBmM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=116&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpearlite%2Bphase%2Bdiagram&hl=en&usg=__4vGVCCIdAKTtrK-X4HK7Zo_Yx_g=&ei=DvP3S6aAOJ6mNdCD9ZQF&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=3&ct=image&ved=0CB0Q9QEwAg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.68.250.18 (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absoluteastronomy dot com is a known mirror of Wikipedia. Wizard191 (talk) 12:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lamellar appearance

The following statement has been in the first paragraph of the lede since it was added by an anonymous editor on March 6th, 2011. This sentence is excessively detailed for the lede and it appears to be unsourced.

In fact, the lamellar appearance is misleading since the individual lamellae within a colony are connected in three dimensions; a single colony is therefore an interpenetrating bicrystal of ferrite and cementite.

I suppressed this sentence on 14 August. No-one has responded to support its retention so I have deleted it - see my diff. Dolphin (t) 07:55, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]