Talk:Photofragment-ion imaging

General

How should we organise this page? Something needed about the experimental configuration and, of course, the velocity map imaging (Eppink&Parker) and slice imaging (Townsend&Suits) configurations. LaserRepairman (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

"The Product Imaging Technique" section is too narrow in scope. It either belongs in background or a history section. The variations of product imaging could be grouped into an advanced methods, current methods, or just methods of imaging techniques. This page needs work. LocoFreek25 (talk) 23:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Where did discussion of the inversion\reconstruction\deconvolution techniques that was in the VMI article end up? It is pertinent and useful. I don't see how it would fit into the layout of this article. LocoFreek25 (talk) 23:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Citation

The first two sentences of background ("Many problems in molecular... products can be specified") are virtually the same as the introuction for Houston's contribution to "Imaging in Molecular Dynamics Technology and Applications" on page 3, although it uses Houston's article as a reference. I see two possible issues with this. The primary issue is a matter of copyright. The secondary issue is a matter of proper citation. LocoFreek25 (talk) 23:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Image usage

For your information, Wikipedia allows only 2 kinds of images:

1. Free images - images which have a license which allows subsequent re-use, including creating derivative works and commercial use.
2. Fair use - see WP:FAIRUSE for a description of the conditions necessary.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

If that image or a similar one can't be returned, the text needs to be updated; it makes reference to the result image in several locations... Mverleg (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Example section deletion

Is it really necessary to include the list of research groups that use variations on the experiment? At this point in time, imaging techniques have become so widespread in use that this list creates a bias toward the research of some groups over many other groups. While it is necessary to cite some groups for their pioneering work into the technique (Chandler/Houston, Eppinck/Parker, etc.), most of these groups are discussed at length in the article and there is no need to include them on such a list. Unless editors can provide appropriate justification for keeping the list, I will likely remove it sometime in the near future. JCMPC (talk) 16:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)