User talk:Gaucho69

Velarus

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Velarus, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. - BillCJ 19:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the removal because there is no specific rationale for its removal. Velarus is real next generation technology, just like quantum computers. And yet Wikipedia has an article on Qunatum Computers. I am an Aerospace Scientist, with more than 40 years experience. Someone with much less knowledge should have nothing to say about the L/P drive system technology of the Velarus. By the way, Velarus is not soliciting investors. That opinion is false. And as for a third party, how about the US Patent Office? --Gaucho69 19:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Patent Office is not a verifiable source, it just records the patents, and that is all it can verify. In addition, you need sources to claim notability, especially if your going to claim it's comparable to the quantam computer. That article has 17 citations, 6 other sources, and a very lengthy Further reading section. This article has a website by the company.

There is nothing substantial here or on the company website about the proposed product. A helicopter's engines, transmissions, driveshafts, and rotors could well be called a lift/propulsion system, as could the Harrier's Peagasus vectored thrust engine. While I may not be an aerospace engineer, I have a fair understanding of how they work. I have no clue how the Velarus L/P system works, and that is becuase the system is not descibed at all, which is in itself suspicious. The Moller Skycar has plenty of detalis, yet it is suspected of being an investment scam by many. Given the lack of information, thinking the same of the Velarus is only natural at this point.

If this project proceeds to the point were it recieve notable media coverage (especially trade publications), and seems to be a viable product at that point, then an articel could be created. At this point though, it should be deleted, as I will state more thoroughly in my AfD nomination. Thanks. - BillCJ 20:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I have deleted this article, and wanted to let you know why. First and foremost, it appears to be what we call "spam", an article designed to promote a product or project, and mainly serves to drive viewers to the product's web page. Second, the article fails on notability grounds. Notability is established by external, secondary sources, mainly non-trivial media references. Other than the product's website, there does not appear to be such external sources which would confer notability. At this point, the project appears to be nothing more than a patent application and a website. If you are not connected to the project, I invite you to return here in the future once the project has attracted main-stream, or at least reputable industry media attention. Also, please note, if you are connected to the project, it is inappropriate to use Wikipedia to promote it, as that is contrary to our conflict of interest guildelines. If you have any questions, you can respond here or on my talk page. AKRadecki^Speaketh 19:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]