 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Nuventix Marketing Department Was Here edit
I'm sorry, but the section on "Synjet" technology reads like it was written by the Nuventix marketing department. I'm going to remove it unless anybody objects... Drnathanfurious (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Seems consistent edit
Full disclosure: i am a nuventix employee, and a synjet enthusiast, so i am biased towards them and what we are doing here.
We do not want to screw up wikipedia or appear to be using it for commercial goals. in that spririt, as we work to take the physics of synthetic jets and create new products around them, we think we are doing something interesting and worth preserving within wikipedia. we are inventing a new type of air mover, and new products to go with it.
Having surveyed some parts of wikipedia, it is my opinion that the discussion of "synjet devices" seems consistent with the discussion of other specific embodiments of other technologies. check out the "pentium" page which discusses that family of microprocessors. air jordan sneakers are extensively documented. oakley sunglasses are featured with lots of photos.
I would like to put examples of how the technology works, and also photos of some of the products because i think they will educate engineers, and will also educate the people who buy products that have synjet coolers in them. I would like people to be able to come here and get educated outside the realm of our corporate marketing group which is, well, corporate.
Does this make any sense?
Customuser (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC) customuser
- I agree with your suggestions about how the article can be improved; it needs a more in-depth and technical purview, rather than an overview of the advantages of the technology. Maybe you could get some engineers involved and help improve the article? That would make it more encyclopedic and less like it was written by a marketing department. Drnathanfurious (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks edit
I am one of those engineers. we have a lot on our plate right now, so give us a little time and we'll do some more work on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Customuser (talk • contribs) 19:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)