• Improve wikipedia's coverage on materials.

• The project covers all articles about materials.

1. KAP03 (talk · contribs) 05:27, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
2. SzMithrandir (talk · contribs) - Interesting, what's our scope? I saw brush. 16:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
3. LRFtheLion (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC) Some concrete-related articles could use some work. Anyone still active in this project?[reply]

   Well, it does look as if there's not very much happening at present. It sounds like an important initiative, but it clearly needs a few more active participants. Is somebody in overall charge? BillClyne (talk) 10:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   @BillClyne Let's start something if you are keen. We re-organise this page, make a to do list and also create a user padg. tag me when you reposnd so i get notified. FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   Well, I'd be happy to put in some effort. Of course, there is already quite a lot of Materials-related coverage in Wiki. There are bound to be gaps, but there are already hundreds, if not thousands, of articles that are recognisably in the field of Materials, even if it is restricted to topics that relate in some way to the Processing - Microstructure - Properties paradigm. I can in any event see some scope for there being a useful WikiProject in the area. Do you know how and when that table was created? I suppose that a potential step is to identify all of the existing articles in the field and it looks as if someone has already tried to do this. Are they accessible somewhere as a consolidated list? A table in which they were categorised by sub-topic might be helpful. Also, do you have a list of editors or contributors who are already potentially interested? The "participants" list certainly looks a bit thin at present. Would it be possible to circulate a message to people who have been active in creating Materials-related content? BillClyne (talk) 09:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Sargent (Hi Bill!) Over the past couple of years I have been correcting the most egregious stupidities that are regularly added to the hydrogen embrittlement pages by ignorant "enthusiasts". This, and the fracture mechanics pages, are very important for public policy as most science journalists are woefully ignorant on this.

1. AresLiam (talk · contribs) - elastomers, polymers, fatigue and fracture - those are my specialties. Happy to help out here if there is still need... 22:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. Help improve the articles for decorative concrete and stamped concrete
2. most things constitute being a material, from Joe Biden to Mercury (planet). The title should be Materials science instead. The word materials was in the discipline infancy and I think now it is the time to change it, given that most materials department are now called materials science department including journals. just type material science in the search bar up
3. I think it's true that a clear definition would be helpful. For example, it could be taken to encompass the whole Biological and Biomedical field, as well as a lot of stuff that is basically Physics or Chemistry. That would make the subject much too diffuse. The core of Materials is really the Processing-Microstructure-Properties linkages. Microstructure is arguably what makes Materials a separate subject, since its subtleties and importance are not understood by Physicists or Chemists. I agree that we could narrow it down to Materials Science, although it's sometimes difficult in the Materials field to separate Science and Technology - it's certainly an Applied Science. In any event, we should perhaps aim to map out how the coverage in Wiki could be categorised and potentially improved. Is this a task? Also, is this initiative being overseen by some established Wiki editors?

• Category:Materials
• Category:WikiProject Materials articles

Template:WikiProject Materials - for putting onto articles in this project's scope.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Mining