Aartich

Welcome

Hello Aartich and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Ukexpat and I would like to thank you for your contributions.

Български | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Lietuvių | 한국어 | Magyar | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Suomi | Svenska | Türkçe | 简体中文 | The main embassy page

Click here to reply to this message.

ukexpat (talk) 22:45, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:CCVD.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:CCVD.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 20:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't have OTRS access, however, as soon as they do get the correct e-mail w/permissions, an admin from there will be able to restore the image and apply the appropriate OTRS ticket number. Skier Dude (talk) 05:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Combustion Chemical Vapor Deposition

Thank you for your contribution. It is a difficult task to write a wikipedia article and you did great. There are however several issues which need to be addressed:

• Wikipedia (WP) standards are similar to (or stricter then) those of scientific publications. In particular, the claims of the article have to be supported by in-line reliable references. Unreferenced material may be removed any time. Please don't hesitate to contact me if any questions arise.
• WP articles must keep neutral point of view. The article does look somewhat promotional. Many "capabilities" and "advantages" are not specific to CCVD. "Advantages" do look speculative without a firm support by reliable references.

Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 07:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the above comments -- third party reliable sources must be cited to support notability and the tone needs to be worked on - at the moment the article could be seen as a veiled advertisement for nGimat and its process. But as Materialscientist has said, it's a good start!  – ukexpat (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Combustion chemical vapor deposition follow up

Thanks for the message on my talk page. As mentioned above, the problem is that the article concentrates too much on the NanoSpray process which could be seen as promoting nGimat. If you can add additional material, with references of course, about the other processes, that should deal with the issue. In addition, you need more references generally, to verify the notability of the subject. – ukexpat (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)