From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Polymers
WikiProject icon Polymersome is within the scope of WikiProject Polymers which aims to improve the coverage of polymer-related articles in Wikipedia. If you are interested, you may visit the project page and join with us. Feel free to leave messages at the project talk page. WikiProject icon

WikiProject Medicine may be wrong category?[edit]

Polymersomes represent an active area of research in the boundary area where chemistry, biology and materials science come together; it is not yet an area that would interest practising physicians.

The article is currently under active editing. While not yet perhaps at the level of an expert, I am actively involved in a polymersome research project, with access to several people who are experts. I hope to have this article in better shape before long.Hughesdavidw (talk) 08:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject medicine is not good at all. But then again, the article itself is very sketchy... I've been wanting to completely rewrite it for a while now, but could never find the time. But all in all, yes, it is too heavily focused on biomedical stuff. Biology is not even inherently relevant to polymersomes. Stijndon (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, a complete re-write would be useful, and probably more efficient than the piecemeal approach I've been doing. (Then again, I'm trying to edit on the fly, while working in the lab actually making some polymersomes.) I'm not satisfied with the wording or the organization, though I've been trying to respect previous contributions by retaining (and upgrading) them. But as you say, a complete rewrite would be a good idea.
I agree, biology isn't inherently relevant. The main reason that potential medical uses are emphasized in the literature appears to be that that is where the money is, today.Hughesdavidw (talk) 10:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Your "that's where the money is" comment totally made my day! That, and a successful synthesis ;) Stijndon (talk) 18:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)