Talk:EcoDisc

Latest comment: 14 years ago by 68.146.81.123 in topic Longevity

Hold on

edit

In my opinion only facts - which are also referenced and based through sources - are stated. Thus, this page is not commerce or advertising. Note that I also stated the negative aspects of the product.

Sorry no, you have referenced your companys webpage, there are no other sources to verify what you are claiming. mark nutley (talk) 14:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
What's your actual problem? If you take a look at VCDHD e.g. then you won't see any more sources. Do you want me to proof that the Disc consists of only one layer and uses less CO2? --Lovecrft (talk) 14:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
The problem is you are making claims about a product with no third party reliable sources to back you claims. Please read wp:rs and wp:v to get an idea of what is needed in an article mark nutley (talk) 14:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
I inserted numerous new sources..if you'd be so kind as to look it over. (: --Lovecrft (talk) 15:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
That might be enough to save the article, don`t remove the speedy tag though until an admin has had a chance to look, if it passes muster he/she will remove the tag, good luck mark nutley (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I reviewed the article and have removed the G11 speedy deletion nomination and hangon tags. The article is not unambiguously promotional. I have some substantial doubt that this article would survive an AFD nomination — not so much because of spamishness but because of lack of notability — but I don't think that it qualifies for speedy deletion. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Longevity

edit

What is the longevity of Ecodisc compared to standard DVD? Are they subject to the same oxidization issues as disc-based media? 68.146.81.123 (talk) 23:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)Reply