This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering 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.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass 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.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass articles
This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Regarding statements made in the publication vs media coverageedit
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Previous versions of this article have conflated what is actually reported in the Energy and Environmental Science paper with what has been reported in the wider media coverage, which is misleading. Performance characteristics such as energy density compared to lithium-ion batteries and operating temperature are extrapolations only, and others such as cycle life (1,200 cycles is still stated) are have only been stated by the authors in interviews and not in the peer-reviewed articles, and therefore cannot be verified.
I previously edited this article to clarify that these performance characteristics, and their "advantages" compared to Li-ion batteries were "claims" - strictly in the scientific sense - however this was reverted because of concerns of loaded language. This is fair enough, so I have instead modified the article further to include a new section on the construction and chemistry of the battery based on what is stated in the scientific article alone, and re-edited the following section (which I suggest is "comparison with lithium-ion batteries" instead of "advantages" - no real prototypes of this battery exist yet and such advantages are hypothetical) with the removal of the erroneous statement that these things are stated in the paper.
I do urge future editors of this article to pay attention to what is stated in the peer-reviewed literature and what is unverifiable statements made by the authors in the media. So far, the journalists covering this development have failed to make this distinction. 130.238.180.233 (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
