Talk:Resistance paper
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Original Article was NOT a commercial SPAM article[edit]
I'm not sure what's going on here, but I agree with last post that original article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teledeltos&oldid=660736150 was fine and I think that both "teledeltos paper" and "resistance paper" articles (or at least references to both) should both show up on search for either. I don't know whether Teledeltos was a trade name (like Kleenex) or the inventor's name or direct translation from French, but the original article was NOT 'a commercial SPAM article', not sure where that accusation came from, sounds like from a slightly misguided, if well-intentioned, anti-spam crusader. If Bob Pease called it Teledeltos paper, that's good enough for me. Teledeltos paper is barely even available now, and even if there was a link to a supplier, that would be helpful - I was trying to buy some today, and had a little trouble finding a suitable product. I would wade into this Wikipedia discussion a little deeper except that I know very little about editing Wikipedia articles. Let me know if a 'vote' or something is needed on this - Bob Dickerman rld@dickermanelectronics.com BobDickerman (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- I restored the Teledeltos article. It clearly is not spam.Constant314 (talk) 15:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
What a waste of human potential and encyclopaedic knowledge[edit]
Back in 2012 a informative page was made for a popular (perhaps the only remembered) brand of resistance paper. The content of the page would have related to any brand of Resistance Paper and not have been specific to the generic trade name product.
The old page was a good read https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teledeltos&oldid=660736150
Recently it was redirected to this page which is a 2 line stub of no encyclopaedic merit and is an embarrassment compared to the old page.
The excuse that prompted the removal of the page that had been around for nearly 3 years was
- remove commercial spam article and redirect to generic article
The page was NOT a commercial SPAM article and it does not redirect to an article with any of the previous information or use any of the previous references.
If the reason was the use of the trade name then that should affect scores of other generic trade name pages. If the reason was the use of a link to perhaps one of the last retail suppliers to this arcane product then just remove the link. All the other information is now lost to anyone unversed in viewing histories where previously there was a valuable page that might have been in need of a small edit or two.
Previously an edit was used to correct a possibly inappropriate link.
- deleted citation which is a dead link that redirects to a commercial site with no information about the subject
The link to the commercial site linked to a source of said material which will be difficult for an experimenter to locate. Perhaps it should have been in a See Also link rather than an in-line citation indicating the affordability. I was the editor that inserted that link (and have also made a few other minor changes over time) and have no connection with the paper commercially, having just had hands on experience with the product in the late 80's at university, I believe its use was discontinued soon after.
The French language equivalent of Resistance paper directly translated is Teledeltos Paper this shows that the name was generic in at least two languages and the page name needed no changing.
This move to a descriptive name seems like unnecessary editing.
I believe it should use a template as well I think so it will get listed in places that show such page redirects.
Idyllic press (talk) 20:54, 2 June 2015 (UTC)