Talk:Desertec: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:11, 10 September 2009

Energy Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Energy portal news

Description

Concentrating Solar Power without Solar Cells is proven nonsence, since Concentrating Solar Power with Solar Cells is much better. The second competes with conventional power plants, the first can not. --95.222.227.5 (talk) 08:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for reverting critic section edit

(Old: Revision as of 2009-09-03T11:01:42)

The argument made seemed iffy, the one reference given linked to a "paper" apparently published by one guy in his own "online journal" (which has no other contributions than that author's articles). Within the paper, he even acknowledges a potential conflict of interest with the Desertec project. Also, concerning the IP that made the edit: The only other thing he/she worked on is the article about the guy in question. Seems reason enough to me to declare the source unreliable. Dreiche2 (talk) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section has now been reverted with no comment. Please comment here. Otherwise I will report a dispute.Dreiche2 (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 14:11, 10 September 2009 edit Dreiche2 (talk \| contribs) 19 edits →Reason for reverting critic section edit ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:11, 10 September 2009 edit undo Dreiche2 (talk \| contribs) 19 edits →Reason for reverting critic section edit Next edit →
Line 12:		Line 12:
	The argument made seemed iffy, the one reference given [http://www.isomorph.it/letters/articles/desertec linked to a "paper"] apparently published by one guy in his own "online journal" (which has no other contributions than that author's articles). Within the paper, he even acknowledges a potential conflict of interest with the Desertec project. Also, concerning the IP that made the edit: The only other thing he/she worked on is the article about the guy in question. Seems reason enough to me to declare the source unreliable. [[User:Dreiche2\|Dreiche2]] ([[User talk:Dreiche2\|talk]]) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)		The argument made seemed iffy, the one reference given [http://www.isomorph.it/letters/articles/desertec linked to a "paper"] apparently published by one guy in his own "online journal" (which has no other contributions than that author's articles). Within the paper, he even acknowledges a potential conflict of interest with the Desertec project. Also, concerning the IP that made the edit: The only other thing he/she worked on is the article about the guy in question. Seems reason enough to me to declare the source unreliable. [[User:Dreiche2\|Dreiche2]] ([[User talk:Dreiche2\|talk]]) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

	Section has now been reverted with no comment. Please comment here. Otherwise I will report a dispute.		Section has now been reverted with no comment. Please comment here. Otherwise I will report a dispute.[[User:Dreiche2\|Dreiche2]] ([[User talk:Dreiche2\|talk]]) 14:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)