User talk:AndreiDukhin

Electroacoustic phenomena
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Electroacoustic phenomena, and it appears to include a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 18:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:DL.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:DL.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 14:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Advice
Hi, i have left some advice on the Talk:Double Layer (interfacial) page regarding how to improve it, and your other articles further.--Jac16888 15:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Stress
The three links you just put on the Stress dab page all redirect to Stress (physics). Were you planning on linking them to subsections or creating main pages for them? Otherwise they should be removed. WLU 14:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi,
 * Look, the wikilinks you are adding to Stress are just redirecting to Stress (physics). Click on the links and you'll see what I mean.  That's why I keep removing them.  If you want the wikilinks to stay on the DAB page, you should create those specific pages.  I can tell you how if you'd like, but adding the links isn't helping any readers because it redirects to the physics page, when it should redirect to a page linked to rheology and acoustics.  Creating those pages would be great and helpful to wikipedia, but the links alone are not.  WLU 20:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi,
 * I've reverted the change to the stress page again. To see why, go to this version of the page and click on the links.  Look at the page you are taken to.  It is Stress ( physics ).  I understand what you are trying to do, but it is putting in a misleading link that will confuse readers of the page, not help them.  Please create the appropriate pages, or don't put the wikilinks back.  Thanks, WLU 01:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Surfactant titration
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Surfactant titration, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Surfactant titration is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Surfactant titration, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 21:02, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOSDAB
AndreiDukhin, I note that you have a major interest in Titration (disambiguation). I have made some very heavy edits to this article in the interests of bringing the page into line with the manual of style for disambiguation pages. Please read WP:MOSDAB and the discussion page and discuss if you are uncomfortable with the changes. Not being a chemist I may not have got some things technically correct, you may want to tidy it up but it couldn't take any more words than are already in there. If there were facts in this that do not appear in either the articles themselves or in Titration you may want to add them to those places. Ex nihil (talk) 09:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Dispersion Technology Inc
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dispersion Technology Inc, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.dispersion.com/about-us.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 15:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dispersion Technology Inc
Hello AndreiDukhin,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Dispersion Technology Inc for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian  15:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dispersion Technology Inc


A tag has been placed on Dispersion Technology Inc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.dispersion.com/about-us. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I, JethroBT drop me a line 15:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dispersion Technology Inc


A tag has been placed on Dispersion Technology Inc, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Dispersion Technology Inc
That your competitor has an article does not refute the point that the article you created, as it reads now, basically only serves to promote the company, and is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Please read The plain and simple COI guide before making an article on your company, as it is fairly clear you are associated with it. I realize it doesn't seem fair and is frustrating that competitors have articles, but Wikipedia is simply not a place to promote your company. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, please stop removing the speedy deletion templates (it clearly informs you not to in bold print). An administrator will evaluate your claim on the talk page and make a decision. I, JethroBT  drop me a line 16:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dispersion Technology Inc


A tag has been placed on Dispersion Technology Inc, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Answer about promoting Dispersion Technology
Term promotion means comparison with positive conclusion. I do not compare our company, Dispersion Technology Inc, with others. I simple state fact. Well known and easily verifiable. Wikipedia is about facts. I am offering here facts, nothing more. I am not saying that our products better then others. Just facts. Why offering facts is allowed for Malvern, and not allowed for us?

Dispersion Technology Inc
Hi, thanks for message. Lots of problems. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. You have no references. Even if your external link to the company is counted as a reference, it's clearly not independent. Even if what you say is accepted as fact, I'm not sure that your company meets the notability criteria.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. The use of "we" and "our" is unencyclopaedic, and seems like ownership. Anyone can edit the article, it is not your company's private page. You should not have an invitation to visit your website, and it's not for you to decide what is a leading scientific journal
 * it's all about what the company does, little about the company itself. Locations (it's not even obvious what country you are in)? How many employees? Turnover? Profits? Has the company ever received negative publicity? Who are its competitors?
 * previous versions have been copyright violations, found by the bot. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.
 * You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. Thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

We discourage people from writing about themselves or their companies (using a company as a user name, for example, gets an immediate indefinite block) because it's difficult to get objectivity. It's not actually banned, but it's not easy. The fact that a competitor has an article doesn't help you. Either that article meets the criteria above, or it too should be deleted (I haven't looked)  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Malvern
Malvern's page has the feel of something I should delete, but it's actually pretty well fire-proof. Even the claim of significance is reffed to an impeccable source. The extensive referencing to independent sources, apparent notability and lack of blatant spam means that it cannot be speedy deleted. I could be tagged for a deletion discussion, but I think that would fail. It's a good model  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:07, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Dispersion Technology Inc
Thank you very much. We will try to construct similar page. Will take some time. I will send you message when we finish. AndreiDukhin 


 * I suggest that you initially create it here so that it can be checked before being moved to article space. It's always worth doing that anyway to make sure formatting etc is OK.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Note that I've tweaked your signature, it was making everything subsequent red and bold!  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I made these edits, most MoS. Note that refs should immediately follow punctuation.
 * Refs from 21 on need tweaking to remove the etraneous numbers; I did it for the three ISOs earlier on. You just need to move the closing ] to include at least some of the description as well as the url.
 * The Elsevier ref is a sales site, better if you can replace with a ref that confirms its existence but isn't selling it
 * When you have done that you will need to move the page (you should see a move tab somewhere) to its original title. Note that your article may still be challenged, and that the similarity to Malvern may or may not help. <b style="font-family:chiller; color:red;"> Jimfbleak - </b> talk to me?  16:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dispersion Technology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conductivity and Milling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:CVI.gif


A tag has been placed on File:CVI.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dispersion Technology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Electrokinetics and Feature article ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Dispersion_Technology check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Dispersion_Technology?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:09, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Volume viscosity page
Hello, I hope you are doing well. Did you see the reply I posted to you on my talk page? I might want to work on the article a bit today. MaxwellMolecule (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2019 (UTC)