Talk:CHEMKIN

Promotional tone

My link to the free chemical kinetics software program, Kintecus was deleted while this expensive CHEMKIN program remains? This doesn't make any sense....

It makes perfect sense. Kintecus is not used by nearly as many companies, is not as famous, and has not had as much impact on the field as CHEMKIN has. CHEMKIN is more notable. Wikipedia is not here to make your product famous for you. Get your program to be notable and then you can have a link. U$er 17:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So... Um. Yeah. The entire article reads exactly like an ad for Chemkin. Important claims completely lack sources, and it was created and mainly written by a Reaction Design IP. I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia editing, and unfamiliar with the procedures, but this seriously calls for either a complete re-write or a deletion. 85.230.106.1 (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed a couple of obvious marketing statements, inserted citation needed tags at claims which needs citations in order to stay. This is only a temporary edit, but it's better than leaving it as it was. Grateful if anyone other than a Reaction Design employee could contribute more...85.230.106.1 (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, although not entirely banned, conflicts of interest are not encouraged. I am proposing a merge into the Reaction Design company article, which has a better chance of surviving a notability challenge. Generally a topic needs citations to sources that are independent of its promoters in order to stay. W Nowicki (talk) 18:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree. But since I'm connected to another company working in the same field, I'm not comfortable with myself doing any more drastic changes than the cleanup I already did.85.235.1.129 (talk) 12:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree; CHEMKIN has history back before the current company, and there are even free copies of the early versions floating around on the net. We should clean up the page and remove the merge tag. CHEMKIN is clearly notable independently of the company that develops it (more so, I would argue, since I was aware of CHEMKIN long before Reaction Design). Jdpipe (talk) 23:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources modified on CHEMKIN

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just attempted to maintain the sources on CHEMKIN. I managed to add archive links to 1 source, out of the total 1 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.

Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update Link to Ansys's Website

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi all,

Any chance we can update the link in the first bullet point under "External Links"?

"CHEMKIN web page" currently points to https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ansys-chemkin-enterprise. But this redirects to https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ansys-chemkin-pro. So can update the link to the latter?

Even though this seems to be an "uncontroversial" edit, given my conflict of interest, I'd prefer that an independent editor review it first.

Thank you.

Signed,
BlueRoses13 (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

URL updated. Regards, Spintendo 19:08, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Spintendo! Signed, BlueRoses13 (talk) 10:47, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]