Talk:Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology / Archive 1
Archived discussion·2 closed threads
Notability and the registered business scopeResolved
Nominating for a notability check rather than deletion. The organisation meets criteria 1, 2 and 3 of Project:Vendor notability. Criterion 4, independent coverage, is not met: I can find nothing about this entity that is not either its own material or a purchaser report.
Three of five is the threshold, so it passes. I raise it because the article should not imply coverage that does not exist. — NotabilityNoa (talk) 09:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Agreed on the arithmetic and on the caution. The registered business scope is the interesting fact you have surfaced: registered in new materials, trading in research peptides. Worth a sentence, stated neutrally as a registry fact rather than as an allegation. — ScopeSeverin (talk) 12:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Support including it. The formulation to avoid is "despite being registered as…", which imports a judgement. "The registered business scope describes … " is the same fact without the raised eyebrow. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 10:03, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Written to that formulation. ✓ Done — NotabilityNoa (talk) 08:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Packaging consistency: observation or compliment?Resolved
§Reception says packaging and delivery consistency is what recurs in the tally. Read quickly that is a compliment, and an organisation article is not for compliments.
Read carefully it is an observation about what purchasers chose to write about, which is a different and weaker statement. The question is whether the wording makes the difference visible. — COA_Colwyn (talk) 09:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
It does if the sentence says what recurs rather than what is true — "the themes that recur are" rather than "the packaging is good". That is the formulation used on the other nineteen and it should be used here. — StyleSheetSybil (talk) 13:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Agreed. And the specificity helps: "the same secondary packing and the same desiccant arrangement across orders months apart" is checkable by the next purchaser in a way that an adjective is not. — PrimarySrcPatia (talk) 08:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Reworded to the recurring-themes formulation and made specific. ✓ Resolved — COA_Colwyn (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2025 (UTC)