Talk:Spectrolab

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Spectrolab article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

untitled[edit]

Why is spectrolab who refers only to their own website and company handouts not considered self promotion whereas my factual statements backed by independent documentation from patents and house of representatives testimony is considered self promotion? Moondoggie suggested I change my username to something less self-referential. Does that change what is going on or just the appearance of what is going on? Knowing Spectrolab they had their PR people write their entry. I guess if I'm interested, I could do the same thing. Obviously, an entry that refers only to company handouts and company website is in some sense more self promotional than an entry that has 33% company literature and 67% government documents. Yet that latter website is publicly pilloried as self promotional.

My biggest beef, and the reason I'm writing here today, is to suggest that you use a more professional approach to your reviews? My experience with peer reviewed literature is that folks have a SPECIFIC objection and a suggested correction. Haha - I thought I was doing the world a favor letting loose with stuff I have discovered and explaining it in a way everyone could understand. I know Prism would have appreciated what I had to say! haha - and I was planning to make a few comments that would benefit Photovolt's efforts - solving their junction loss problem - haha - because I've just filed a few things - but that's self promotion again isn't it. Despite the fact its all true, all important and all terribly interesting.

The advertising people told me have them do the PR - and I guess they were right - haha - I feel like granpa Simpson writing letters to President Nixon or something. Freaking waste of time. We're not connecting and so I guess it doesn't matter.

Ciao Mokenergycorp (talk) 19:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exotic materials[edit]

What's exotic about germanium (first generation transistors) and gallium arsenide (LEDs)? Peridon (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

potential resource[edit]

Patent Watch - Airborne power station by Adam Piore Scientific American January 5, 2012 (1.2012 issue, page 23). See the U.S. Army. 99.181.147.68 (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

??[edit]

Spectrolab is good and all, but this article reads like a PR release.128.97.68.15 (talk) 22:49, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]