Talk:Post-column oxidation–reduction reactor

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 February 2022. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

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

Chemical and Bio Engineering (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Chemistry Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Articles for creation This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information. This article was accepted from this draft on 18 June 2016 by reviewer DGG (talk · contribs).

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Ckrumm (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. KimberlyHerzog (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. Activated2014 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.

Trying to learn

How are articles nominated for deletion - and why was this article nominated?

What are some approaches to fix this article so it is not connected to people personally or professionally connected? Just better sourcing?

thanks

Cairnesteak (talk) 04:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. If you go read the archived discussion posted under "the discussion" link, it goes more into depth on why some editors think it should be deleted or changed.

Since the original article approval, and since the discussion, the article has been renamed from Polyarc reactor to a more general, industry-specific name of post column oxidation-reduction reactor. The name was originally attached to a trademarked, professional product. Therefore, in the interest of being a neutral, impartial encyclopedia, using brand names in industrial processes is bad.

As for the way forward, without digging deep into it, would probably be more external, meaningful references; less pointed language that could be construed towards a company's specific product, and overall a change in tone from "Buy this product because XYZ" to a tone of "this product/process completes XYZ." Possibly a mention of a patent-holding designer/company, but again, not in the way of promotion. A good example of this is the Diesel engine. While its common for everyone to call it the diesel engine after the last 100 years of existence, the name is derived from the inventor's last name rather a name describing the actual physical process (which is mentioned in the first paragraph of the article) ChemicalBear (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Cairnesteak (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think that with the edits, we are closer to being able to remove some of the alerts around conflict of interest? Alligatorzinc (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think more work needs to be done. The title was changed but there is still info about "polyarc" in the article itself.

Arguably the advantages/disadvantages section should be removed. It seems to be either promotional or original research/opinion. If others agree someone can remove to get this article more towards neutral. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:49, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]