I changed the following sentence:
"A mole is simply a unit of the volume" to "A mole is simply a unit of the number of things."
I understand what the author was getting at but I don't think I would use the word 'volume' in this context because in its original form it really did read as if a mole was a unit of three dimensional volume space.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
First Edit! Woo!
Just made a few changes to the page--here's a more detailed explanation:
-Changed the use of "we" in the opening section to non-personal terms ("scientists use..." and "anything can be..."), along with a few other tweaks
-Also added examples of other words that represent specific values (for extra clarity), and rephrased other bits of the last paragraph of Mathematics (for added professionalism/clarity). Also changed the sentence referring to grams: it's not that grams can't be used to measure reactions, its just that reactions occur between individual molecules of varying weights, making the relative weights of reactants somewhat misleading (e.g. 2 hydrogen molecules will react with 1 oxygen molecule to make water, but the weight of the oxygen involved will still be greater than that of the hydrogen.)
-Also: should explanations of what a mole is should be split off into a new section? (maybe called "explanation" or "meaning"?
-And lastly: would it help to have the value of 1 mole written out long-form? scientific notation can be confusing to those lacking in science/math fundamentals, so having it written out in full could help reinforce the fact a mole refers to a quantity and not some other sort of measurement.Food Critic (talk) 19:54, 9 October 2017 (UTC)