Talk to me...
- Okay. Yes, you are "new to editing Wikipedia," in that you don't know a cardinal rule: When posting to a page such as Talk:CompactFlash, you should always sign it by typing ~~~~, which the software changes to a standard signature and a timestamp, like mine below. On a deeper level, someone should tell you that Wikipedia would spiral out of control if everyone could use it as an advertising medium for what their company has just announced. The dominant standard (someone more senior than I could actually point you to policy pages) is that an unaffiliated third party confirms it. So, when your company completes the product and it gets reviewed, then your impartial summary of the review, with a footnote pointing to the reviewer, would be welcome. I would be more active here if skillful storytelling were more welcome than merely documenting references in the press; but as I said, Wikipedia would then become a tool for editors with a lot of personal agendas. Spike-from-NH (talk) 02:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Spike,
Thanks for letting me know about the signing markup - I'm used to wiki's that do that for you, sorry. I added my signature to the edits.
Re: I was not intending to "use it as an advertising medium...". I was browsing through the page (on my personal time, not representing AJA) and saw this:
"CFast 2.0 specification has been released in Q4 2012. As of 2014, the only product employing CFast 2.0 cards is Arri Amira digital production camera,[44] allowing frame rates of up to 200 fps; a CFast 2.0 adapter for Alexa/XT camera has also been released.[45]
On April 7th 2014 Blackmagic Design announced the URSA cinema camera which records to CFast media.[46]
On April 8th 2015 Canon Inc. announced the XC10 video camera which also makes use of the CFast cards and Black Magic Design announced the URSA Mini will using CFast 2.0[47]"
From reading this list of product references I had no idea that adding our company's adapter to the list of existing products that support CFast would be problematic. All of the existing footnotes referenced are not third party reviews, they are links to those company's product press releases. I was simply following the (apparent) pre-existing pattern.
I cannot see how my edits are any different than those of Black Magic nor Arri. If my edit is not allowed according to Wikipedia policy then may I suggest that the references to those other products be removed as well. It would only be fair. Unless I'm missing something which is entirely possible since I've never edited a (talk) page before.
Again, I'm not AJA's marketing department, just one of their engineers and I am not representing them officially. I saw what I thought was an omission and tried to fix it. Frankly, I was surprised to see those other products listed there...
Thanks for taking time to review the edits. Kahunamoore (talk) 08:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply! I did not indeed review the edits, only read your suggestion, which struck me as inappropriate. The other product announcements strike me as inappropriate too, given that there are a lot of product announcements that are not followed by product. It might be relevant, even if none of the products ever came to market, that three companies had embraced an extension of the standard. Once the trade press reports that CFast has come into wide use, those articles would be directly relevant, but a list of all compatible products would be tedious. All the policy I can find is WP:PROMOTION item 5. This would argue against a note that AJA has partnered with a charity, but is ambiguous about AJA announcing a relevant future product. The relevant point for this article is not what AJA intends to do but whether or not CFast is gaining acceptance. Your options are: (1) Just add it; (2) go in and delete the others; (3) mention this discussion at Talk:CompactFlash and try to get someone's opinion more authoritative than mine. Cheers! Spike-from-NH (talk) 22:46, 27 November 2015 (UTC)