Draft talk:Ultrasonic metal atomization

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Metalworking

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking 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.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking

Materials

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials 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.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials

Business

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business

Poland

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland

Concerns regarding recent edits and adherence to sourcing guidelines

Hello,

I would like to raise a concern regarding recent edits to this article, particularly in relation to adherence to Wikipedia’s sourcing guidelines. In the latest revisions, all previously included academic references and scientifically grounded content were removed. Unfortunately, the current version seems to rely heavily on promotional language and lacks the independent, verifiable sources required by Wikipedia.

If an editor wishes to improve or expand the article, the appropriate approach would be to **edit and build upon** the existing content—not to remove well-sourced scientific information and replace it with content connected to a commercial entity. This approach may violate Wikipedia’s core principles on [neutral point of view](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view), [verifiability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability), and [conflict of interest](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest).

I suggest we consider restoring the original content supported by academic sources, particularly as references to key sources like the articles and webpages from Warsaw University of Technology have been removed. I also encourage the editor, especially if this is their first edit on Wikipedia, to add the relevant research papers that were originally mentioned.

Thank you! Alicja Głaszczka (talk) 13:39, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alicja Głaszczka, as far as I can tell, your comments here seem to apply to Ultrasonic atomization, where an editor did remove several thousand characters of content on the 10th, not this page, Draft:Ultrasonic metal atomization. I haven't studied the edits closely enough to determine whether they're problematic, but if your concern is the changes to that page, you should open the discussion at Talk:Ultrasonic atomization, not here, and/or revert the recent changes made at that page. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill Thank you very much for your clarification and guidance.

You were absolutely right — my original comment was mistakenly posted here, while the actual issue concerned the main article, *Ultrasonic atomization*. I sincerely apologize for the confusion and misplacement.

Following your suggestion, I reverted the recent changes that had removed well-sourced academic content. Thank you again for pointing me in the right direction and for your patience — I truly appreciate your help! Alicja Głaszczka (talk) 13:04, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]