User talk:YGelfman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome 2 American Technologies Network Corporation 3 Image copyright problem with Image:ATN-Night-Shadow-XR5.gif 4 Image copyright problem with Image:ATN-Golden-Eye-8x-scope.gif 5 Image copyright problem with Image:ATN Night Shadow XR5.gif 6 ATN 7 Reverts

[edit] Welcome

[edit] American Technologies Network Corporation

This article makes spammy claims without in-line verifiable and independent references eg

1. these devices have the reasonable quality and due to low price they are available for customers with narrow means
2. Objective lenses in the devices of this company are made from top brands optical glass, and construction of lens for every device is calculated with the help of the newest computer programs developed specially for this purpose. Besides, in order that devices have maximum aperture, all the lenses have special multilayer coating developed by the ATN engineers.
3. Engineers of ATN are the authors of several innovatory discoveries, what were carried on by other manufacturers.
4. this company was the first that invented devices with replaceable lenses, attachments allowing to increase zoom factor, and remote control devices.
5. It substitutes with success mechanical limiters used to avoid the illumination of the noctovisor.
6. This totally water-resistant device doesn’t drown when in the water, that is very convenient to those who need to overcome water obstacles often.
7. Company constantly widens range of production, striving for using every possible technical innovation. In the same active way it tries to penetrate the market of night vision. Today ATN dealers work on the all continents and in all major countries.

Jimfbleak (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've had a quick look at a couple, and they aren't models of encyclopaedic style either. Why not recreate, just missing out the spammier words/phrases, particularly those that are indicated in point 7 above? The other point to note is that you don't have any independent verifiable sources, they are all company sites, so a couple of neutral references would be helpful

Jimfbleak (talk) 16:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:ATN-Night-Shadow-XR5.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:ATN-Night-Shadow-XR5.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 (talk) 11:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:ATN-Golden-Eye-8x-scope.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:ATN-Golden-Eye-8x-scope.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 (talk) 11:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:ATN Night Shadow XR5.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:ATN Night Shadow XR5.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. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 11:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ATN

I've cleaned this up quite a bit, but there are places where I couldn't make sense of the English. Not sure what the <<>> were for, flagicons inappropriate. Really still needs more independent refs, I'll let it go, but I think it's still vulnerable Jimfbleak (talk) 12:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It substitutes mechanical limiters used to avoid the illumination of the noctovisor. Such coatings help to avoid the scratches, misting, flares and accumulation of static charge.

Jimfbleak (talk) 12:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I have done some more cleanup of this article and added tags noting it may be an un-encyclopedic advertisement. Image:ATN-Golden-Eye.gif and Image:ATN-Night-Shadow-XR5.gif are also a problem. They are copied from the company website so the usage tag is wrong. You did not create them. If you did create or own them then we are into a big WP:COI problem here. You should read the relevant Wikipedia guidelines on SPAM. I (or someone else) will probably tag the article and the images for speedy deletion unless there is some significant evidence that this is something other then an advertisement masquerading as an article. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 02:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a directory of all businesses that exist. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that includes articles that describe notable businesses. The article did not describe the company as much as it described its products. It also failed to cite any 2nd party references that established notability. Failure to establish that make the article little more than a promotional piece (SPAM). Further cleanup is required. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

PS ... oops... forgot to say, don't take anything I say as something official. There are official guideline links on most of the things I am pointing out. You can find information on what i am citing there. You can also get further opinion from other editors and even submit the article for review by other editors. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 17:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The third ref is spammy, and the fifth is effectively a picture of an ATN advert. The fourth one at least appears to be third party, but since you can't read the subscription text, it's hard to tell. Surely someone must have reviewed these things? Jimfbleak (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts

Please do not revert edits by other editors (as you did here) without giving some rational for doing so. Such wholesale reverts can be construed as vandalism and treated as such. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

After looking at your edits I see it is not a total revert, my bad. But are still problems. None of the changes were supported by reliable sources. The SWAT reference is not a company description, just product. And the advertising testimonial does not state "US Troops" use the device in in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is just one soldier wishing he had one (and maybe ordering one), but it is not clear and is in general a miss-leading statement. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 18:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)