Talk:Leakage

Remove the intro section?

Since all statements of the "intro" bullets have elaborations in sections below, I suggest removing the first section and absorb the statements in the bullets by the paragraphs below. --Der yck C. 04:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the bullet points should be removed except for quantum mechanics and medicine, as they don't have their own sections. Perhaps a final section should be created for those, like "other uses". --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 13:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then I think I'll do it once I have time. --Der yck C. 13:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article be broken up?

This article is composed of about six topics that seem to have almost nothing to do with each other, beyond using the word 'leakage'. I wonder if the concept of leakage, as an 'unwanted loss of something', is simply too broad to merit an article of its own, and the component topics should be broken up into their own articles; 'leakage current', leakage (economics), etc. or redirected elsewhere? Comments? --Chetvorno^TALK 07:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had had the same thoughts when I updated the semiconductor leakage section Philhower (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barring strenuous objections I am going to break this article up, mostly redirecting terms like retail leakage, income leakage, and audio leakage to appropriate existing articles. --Chetvorno^TALK 01:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken care of it for you. Wizard191 (talk) 01:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]