Talk:Refractive index and extinction coefficient of thin film materials

	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.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 17 September 2014 by reviewer Timtrent (talk · contribs).

‹See TfM›

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is this article self-promotion?

I have some concerns about whether this article should be considered self-promotion. This article is not really about the refractive index and extinction coefficient of thin film materials. That is an extremely general topic and there are several alternative methods. This article seems to be about a specific methodology for determining the refractive index and extinction coefficient using the Forouhi–Bloomer model. The article was created by Nandktech, but n&k Technology is a company and the executive team consists of Dr. Forouhi and Dr. Bloomer. Additionally, the examples in the article contain no references but look very similar to those on the company's website advertising their capabilities.

There is another article on the Forouhi–Bloomer model. Full disclosure, I made it along with several other refractive index model pages. I just cannot get over the fact that this article seems like it could be deleted.

Engiqueer (talk) 13:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with you. The article was clearly written by N and K Tech to promote their products/methods. While the content is not useless, it certainly does not make good on its promise to cover the topic described in the title in a general or broad sense. Instead, it covers one narrow area within the topic, and even then, only describes one method. Tarheels 100 (talk) 16:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the comments from Engiqueer and Tarheels 100. I will mark this as having Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view with a possible Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. Let's see is anyone responds. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Ldm1954 and @Tarheels 100! Engiqueer (talk) 21:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]