User talk:Pentney

Welcome!

Hello, Pentney, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Hansatech Instruments, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Hansatech Instruments


A tag has been placed on Hansatech Instruments requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hansatech Instruments


A tag has been placed on Hansatech Instruments requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Pentney (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, I had to delete the article, because it stands it gives no indiction that the company is important. But let me give you some advice on how it might be possible to write an article that will be judged acceptable. Of all the admins here, I am one of the most sympathetic to articles on commercial businesses and defend them against challenges; and, as myself by original profession a biochemist, I understand why such products as you describe can indeed be important--and I frequently work on articles about scientists But I cannot judge by my own preferences, but I must give you advice on the basis of what the community here is likely to accept.

A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. To show a company is important, the standard is WP:CORP

In order show the company important, you need references showing this specifically that they have   developed a product or range of products of such importance that their development of it is acknowledged by such references. From what you say, this should be possible. It will be enormously easier if the contribution of the company is given specifically in outside published sources, not merely that important papers have been published using their instruments, from which the importance of the company can be inferred (it's still possible, if there are enough such papers--I've used such arguments successfully here--but if there is a specific statement, it makes it easy & uncontroversial).

I suggest the following, done in successive steps:

The best  approach, I think, would be to first supplement the article on David Alan Walker. It's woeful deficient for a person of such importance. What is necessary to add is, first, the sequence of his academic positions;  second, a list of all the books he has written or edited in full bibliographic format with reference to reviews of them;  third, a somewhat fuller but still selected list of his papers, including the number of citation to them from Web of Science or Scopus; fourth, a check whether their are any additional awards; fifth, and most important, a description of what his major discoveries actually were. Look carefully in his papers for references to the company, and cite them specifically. If Walker has a connection as a scientific advisor with the company, mention it. That alone will be sufficient justification for putting in a redirect from the name of the company--I can help you with the wording.

Second, to write an section, about a paragraph long, on Delayed chlorophyll fluorescence in the article Chlorophyll fluorescence. Give the basic references, including those to the development of instrumentation. Try to include one that is not limited by being behind a paywall. Make sure to distinguish it from related methods--that's a common problem for this sort of article. Then, either now or later, expand this into a separate article on the method, as extensive as the material will bear. If there is any individual other than Walker who is responsible for the method, write an article on him. If he has a conenction with the company,say so.

Then ,write the article as a company, making the necessary links in both directions. Having done this you will have truly helped the user understand not just the importance of the company, but the importance of the subject with which the company is associated, and provide a basis for whatever links are justified, If you do not have time for all of this programme, then write at least the section on the method in the general article, making sure the name of the company is mentioned.

If I can help you with any of this, let me know on my talk page. You'll see there the records of similar help I've given others.  DGG ( talk ) 05:39, 24 March 2012 (UTC)