Talk:QEMSCAN

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

removed deletion tag: {{Proposed deletion/dated}} after adding a number of published references from different journals and authors. Didn't manage to do so Friday night when I was expanding the existing article. David Haberlah (talk) 01:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that references would be.better represented in it's own category. As these are maintained by commercial competitors it is difficult to maintain objectivity in a single article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelowen75 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What I stated 'these are maintained by commercial competitors' I was referring to QEMSCAN. And apologies for failing to sign the previous discussion post, as I'm still learning how to edit properly Michaelowen75 (talk) 22:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed all references of as discussed before. While could be inspired by an earlier QEMSCAN version (R series), both are different products, based on different software and hardware. Both products are developed and marketed by different companies, QEMSCAN by FEI Company, . It is here suggested that a separateentry is created if there is enough independent information (peer-reviewed references) and public interest. --David Haberlah (talk) 02:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why have the references been inserted again on a page about QemScan? And why was there no discussion about it here? These actions seem highly dubious and against the spirit of Wikipedia. If the editor of wishes to talk about their technology, it should have it's own page, perhaps linked from wikipedia entry. Secondly, the bold text in the title of "QEMSCAN WellSite" is unnecessary. Thirdly, the 24 hour support sentence appears like advertising and should be removed as such. Finally, the deletion of the link to FEI Natural Resources and replacing with a link to. I will re-iterate my belief that information should be in it's own page, and would like to discuss this with the editor who added it. Michaelowen75 (talk) 02:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to Michaelowen75: I agree with all the above points and removed the discussed changes. The unidentified source appears to have enough knowledge to know that there is no factual link between QEMSCAN and. QEMSCAN is a trademark protected well-established automated mineralogy and petrography solution owned by FE is a newly released product by It would be great to see a separate entry evolve once is . At this stage, linking QEMSCAN clearly looks like , and might need to be escalated if changes are reinstated. However, the one change that I agree under these circumstances is the removal of external links to respective company web presences. David Haberlah (talk) 06:00, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask again - why are references being inserted into an encyclopaedia entry on QemScan? They are similar technologies, but are not the same thing. Do you see references to the Samsung Galaxy on the iPad page? This is the same thing. Please create a page. And update the discussion page if you believe I am wrong. Michael Owen (talk) 07:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As there was no discussion about following my recent post, I have removed the unrelated links from this page. Michael Owen (talk) 05:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned up a minor incorrect factual error - Carl Zeiss microscopes were used by QemScan to perform mineral analysis; but Carl Zeiss did not manufacture QemScan. QemScan was (and is) a software product that ran on Windows PCs. Also removed some minor unrelated spam to RoqScan. RoqScan should have it's own page in wikipedia (as I have mentioned previously here). Michael Owen (talk) 07:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A general question - there have been two recent edits I'd like to ask questions about - "advert" and "notability". With regards the first, do others think that this is written like an advertisement? It seems to me as though the only commercial connection is a link to the current rights holder for QEMSCAN (FEI Company). The technology itself was developed at Australia's research body CSIRO, and spawned a new industry that now has several players. So, there seems little (in my opinion) that is advertising for this product. With regards to the second, the technology is now owned by FEI Company. This company sells scanning and tunnelling electron microscopes of various flavours, and the QEMSCAN product is quite different in that it comprises a software/hardware industrial product, rather than a research tool. Are there any thoughts here? Michael Owen (talk) 01:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This Wikipedia page is an advertisement for the FEI QEMSCAN system. Automated mineralogy is the technique, QEMSCAN is one of the technologies available to undertake this analysis.

Personally, I can't see any paragraph or sentence in this entry that is written in the style of an advertisement or not factual. It is well understood that QEMSCAN, among MLA, RoqSCAN, TIMA and others, is an automated mineralogy solution. There is a separate entry for this technology and as discussed above, it would be recommendable to create separate entries to these software solutions based on peer-reviewed published information. I will therefore revert the advert tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Haberlah (talk • contribs) 04:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Calling it a "solution" is classic adspeak. At the very least, could we have a more descriptive term? I'd edit one in myself, but am not actually sure (because the word "solution" conveys no literal meaning) what this thing really is - is it a machine? Is it a system of several machines? Is it a service that one buys? 188.182.238.181 (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
When purchasing a 'qemscan', the buyer received a scanning electron microscope, 2 PCs, a software product called 'iDiscover', a software product called 'iMeasure'; ancilliary pieces of hardware to hold samples; and several days of at-site training; and (at the time) access to online help via email support. There isn't a concise term that encapsulates all the relevent individual pieces. Michael Owen (talk) 05:28, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on QEMSCAN. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:QEMSCAN&oldid=1202723443"