Talk:Espacenet

Latest comment: 16 years ago by JPG-GR in topic Requested move

Removed unsourced information

edit

I have removed the following unsourced information:

The esp@cenet has the following main aims:

  • offer basic patent information to individuals, small and medium-sized enterprises, students etc
  • increase awareness and use of patent information at the national and European levels
  • support innovation, reduce wastage in the innovation cycle
  • supplement existing channels for the dissemination of patent information

Please cite your source. Thanks. --Edcolins 21:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

While doing my best to maintain a no malice view, I have great difficulties in understanding the above logic. Just why wipe the contents rather than take the approcimately 5 seconds on Google to determine the source? So, just google offer basic patent information to individuals, small and medium-sized enterprises, and you get this entry on EPO with the very text. Can this be so hard? And it would be more friendly and more helpful to add a cite tag if you cannot be bothered to Google. --22:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.182.32 (talk)
Thanks for providing your source. The added material, i.e. the claimed aims of esp@cenet, seems to constitute promotional material. Since the source is not independent from the subject, I don't think it is appropriate to have the information in the wikipedia article. Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Reliable sources, and Wikipedia:Primary sources. Thank you. --Edcolins (talk) 11:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Requested move

edit
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Esp@cenetEspacenet — To conform to the standards at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks), i.e. ignore the "official" name and go with normal English. —Mcmullen writes (talk) 20:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Survey

edit
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

edit
Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.