Talk:Physical Review Applied

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Physical Review Applied article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 December 2013. The result of the discussion was Redirect.

Academic Journals

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

‹See TfM›

Physics Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New journal

This is a new journal with the name Physical Review Applied. No need to re-direct. Please discuss here, if you disagree. Sabih omar (talk)

You are violating the consensus from this. You have presented no evidence of there being independent notability. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edited request

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Could you add the following categories to the article

Thanks. It also might be time to reconsider the full protection on this page. The AfD-related dispute is long resolved. Blocking the user would have been much better than FPing the page in the first place.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those are content categories, so I don't think there are appropriate for adding to a redirect. Nonetheless I have lifted the protection. Presumably Mark Arsten is okay with this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Physical Review Applied is NOT Physical Review

The redirect must be removed because Physical Review Applied is a journal all by itself such as Phys. Rev. A, Phys. Rev. B, etc. Yen-Tzu (talk) 13:19, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]