Talk:Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics

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.

Canada: Ontario / Education Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Education in Canada.

Untitled[edit]

The numbers of resident researchers and visitors should be mentioned here. Do the resident researchers get tenure? AxelBoldt (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canada[edit]

There's an allusion here to this being a premier Canadian facility. However, the only universities referenced under the title "Training/Courses" are those found in a tiny cluster in South-West-Central Ontario, within an hour or 2 drive of the institute. This is odd, given that Canada is 9 million square kilometers. So perhaps it really doesn’t have a Canadian focus after all?
--Atikokan (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review the credentials of its director, faculty, and scientific board. It aims to be an internationally accomplished research and educational institute, and appears to be succeeding at this aim. Waterloo would not have established a joint degree program if it were not estimable. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising language[edit]

I have removed a lot of superfluous advertising language. I guess it was all copied from their website or something. Please keep Wikipedia objective and non-biased (something scientists should understand). --EvilFred (talk) 01:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great job thanks. I am removing the old tag and adding a new, now more relevant one. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:16, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

minutephysics[edit]

Shouldn#t a reference be added to minutephysics?109.158.37.116 (talk) 22:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tags being added because sourcing poor, non-independent, and otherwise primary[edit]

For instance, the following citations are from the title organization: refs. 2, 5-9, 11-13, and 15. This is 67% of sourcing that appears, deriving from a non-independent source. This is lazy writing, even of self-promotional, and the editors creating this (even if, no, especially if from PITP) should be ashamed of this encyclopedic representation. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it is time to remove the tags. Sufficient citations have been added to address the concerns raised in October2014. Silverchemist (talk) 03:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

main table coordinates[edit]

add it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4113:5800:4D8F:A1F2:F0DE:A7A6 (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Strong gravity" link is wrong[edit]

The "strong gravity" link takes you to a wiki page about an alternative to QCD. This is not what "strong gravity" refers to at Perimeter. Strong gravity instead refers to studying compact objects, where classical general relativity is important, or otherwise non-quantum aspects of relativistic gravity in general, including alternative theories of gravity or extensions of general relativity. 2605:59C8:26A2:B000:5862:12E5:C0AF:4B46 (talk) 17:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]