Talk:Isotope analysis

Comments

This page needs adding to. It is very onesided, unless you are an archaeologist. The term "isotopic analysis" should also link to the same page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.187.3 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Oxygen isotopes

Cleaned the recently added oxygen section. It needs sourcing and wikifying. Vsmith 03:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Typo

"For best result the researcher would need to know the original leaves, or an estimation there of, of isotopes in the organism at the time of it's death."

Should this read: "... the original levels ...."? --Eroica 12:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

NO. this paragraph is one of the worst written I've seen It should, as most of the article, be rewritten. Jclerman (talk) 13:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

forensics

confusion between isotope variations and isotope compositions Jclerman (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

New sections

I think it would be good to define light stable isotope analysis or have a section on it near the beginning. Sections 1.1.1 to 1.1.3 are relevant but could be incorporated into the applications of isotope analysis. It would also be good to have a brief section on the measurement of isotope ratios with an external link or two to mass spectrometry etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.243.246 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The whole "Tissues affected" section is only relevant to archaeology and only relevant to δ¹⁸O. The information seems fine (although there are no citations in the whole section), but the specificity is misleading. Someone with little background might gather that stable isotopes are only recorded in animals with bones (when in fact isotope analysis is used on all kinds of organisms, all kinds of tissues, and plenty of non-biological materials). This whole section should be removed and information folded into the Archaeology subsection. Natural ironist (talk) 00:11, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Intro

Could somebody possibly write an intro that's not just a collection of jargon-words? An encyclopaedia is not a technical manual, it is to tell lay people about the subject. The intro is particularly important in this regard. What is it used in, archaeology? Then "Isotope analysis is a technique used in archaeology..." What does it do? Maybe "...that uses mass spectrometry to measure the ratio of certain isotopes..." What does it show, where somebody came from? Then "...to determine the place of origin of archaeological remains." I don't know if any of that is right. I came to the article to find out! If somebody with the knowledge is watching this page, can you please write an intro that will help the reader. 86.41.40.165 (talk) 06:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree the intro needs to be rewritten especially since the two sentences on delta O16 & O18 seem to be in total contradiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.199.156.135 (talk) 19:20, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

General Issues

This article is somewhat redundant with other, better articles, such as isotopic signature and isotope geochemistry (less general, better explanations). I understand the need for some kind of general explanation page, but this page currently does a terrible job at providing a general overview of a field that is very much defined by its diverse applications. One option would be to retool this article as "Isotope Analysis in Archaeology", and create a list for isotopic applications. Otherwise, this article needs substantial revisions to make it general and unique. This article might merit renaming to "Stable Isotope Analysis" since there is no discussion of radiogenic isotopes. Natural ironist (talk) 00:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

More succinctly I think this article should be merged with isotopic signature, as there is substantial overlap between the two. Isotopic signature is a somewhat better article but lacks information about fields that are discussed more adequately here. Natural ironist (talk) 00:43, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Isotope analysis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ecophys.biology.utah.edu/Labfolks/Ehleringer/Publications/272.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081019000105/http://conserver.iugo-cafe.org/view.php?id=50 to http://conserver.iugo-cafe.org/view.php?id=50

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)