Talk:Förster coupling

Physics C‑class Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Concerns

Table 2 is referred to in the text but seems to be missing.
It seems to me that the two images in this article are scans of pages out of text books. Having looked at the licensing, they appear to have been published by the copy write holders, i.e. the authors of the respective text books. This seems highly unlikely to me and the summaries are uninformative. It appears they have been cropped from screen shots taken on Google books and published them as their own work with the GNU licence which is incorrect. JHobbs103 (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The references are not formatted correctly using citation templates intended for text books or papers and are uninformative as a result. The third and fourth references don't seems to be in the correct places in the article either.JHobbs103 (talk) 17:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per request and discussion. - GTBacchus^(talk) 16:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Foerster coupling → Förster coupling — T. Förster was german and therefore he is written with ö not oe. Currently Förster coupling is a redirect to Foerster coupling. Förster resonance energy transfer for example has the correct name (and is linked from Foerster... of course). RoB (talk) 10:51, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the above Google book shot it appears the article is named incorrectly - it should be "Förster coupling". JHobbs103 (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A quick look on ADS suggests that Förster is the more common usage: see [1]. Scog (talk) 08:04, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support more common usage, which appears to be "Förster coupling" Erudy (talk) 14:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.