Talk:Large Hadron Collider

message: Hi ,
I'm not disputing that's it true, I'm saying it's unnecessary hyperbolic and inappropriate to use the word "ever" on Wikipedia.
While it looks like there's no difference in meaning in between "The Large Hadron Collider is the world's largest and most powerful particle collider, the most complex experimental facility built and the largest single machine in the world" and "The Large Hadron Collider is the world's largest and most powerful particle collider, the most complex experimental facility ever built and the largest single machine in the world", the word "ever" does not mean "up until now". 
"Ever" is "always", "continuously", "at all times" (sources dictionary.com, Collins, Merriam-Webster). Stating that it is the largest building ever - "always" - is hyperbolic and crystal balling. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:58, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I sympathize with your arguments, and I'm generally not in favor of WP:PUFFERY. When an actual artifact is truly exceptional and "greatest ever" by some objective measure, such as the LHC, the ISS or the Burj Khalifa, some highlighting is deserved and properly encyclopedic. Also, the expression "ever built" flows better than just "built". — JFG talk 15:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , thanks for your understanding. What about "largest building in recorded history" or "up until now" (assuming there aren't any other larger man-made superstructures underway)? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence under consideration is "the most complex experimental facility ever built", not "the largest building". I honestly think that adding "in recorded history" or "up until now" is unnecessary; "ever" does the job quite well. But I'd love to hear comments from other editors. — JFG talk 15:55, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think "ever" is fine. It is clear that there might be a more complex one in the future, and we would know of more complex ones in the past. --mfb (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

text: If something bigger ever appears, future Wikipedians will surely correct the record in due course. — JFG talk 16:26, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

text: At the moment the word only appears in "one of the most expensive scientific instruments ever built". These things don't just appear out of nowhere, it will probably stay true for decades. --mfb (talk) 03:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the word ever is inappropriate 

message: Does large modify "hadron" or does it modify "collider"?
157.131.245.78 (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Collider. --mfb (talk) 15:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

text: It's the collider. The previous machine was called the Large Electron Positron Collider (LEP), while electrons are among the smallest particles making up the Standard Model of nature. — JFG talk 16:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Large modifies what? 

message: The talk archives contain requests for history of the project before it became operational, which I'll reiterate here. Apparently there's info on that in the German version. It could also use some explanation of the history of competition with the Superconducting Super Collider. -- Beland (talk) 01:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing history 

message: There is no information about Run 3 in the article.  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 19:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Run 3 starts in March 2022? 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Views of the LHC tunnel sector 3-4, tirage 2.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for July 4, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-07-04. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 14:33, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: this seems to be the wrong day. Template:POTD/2024-07-04 --mfb (talk) 05:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Amended date. It's now July 4, 2023.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: Far from being an expert, but as I understand it, the 2008 incident was not a magnet quench. It was caused by "a faulty electrical connection between two of the accelerator’s magnets. This resulted in mechanical damage and release of helium from the magnet cold mass into the tunnel."
https://home.cern/news/press-release/cern/cern-releases-analysis-lhc-incident
See also discussion here: https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/03/shields-up-new-ideas-might-make-active-shielding-viable/?comments=1&post=42661000
None of the four (!) references provided seem to support the quench statement, btw.
Cheers! Doceddi (talk) 09:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 incident (section "Operational history")