Contents

Talk:CTF3

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... the http://clic-study.web.cern.ch page has no copyright, but indeed there is no explicit reference to be copyleft. I now re-wrote the text. Sorry. --Gedivad (talk) 09:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are very likely mistaken. I'm not 100% certain about Swiss law (CERN's jurisdiction), but a great deal of the world has had a default copyright for quite some time. The absence of a specific copyright statement should generally be interpreted as "Copyright © <year of original publication> <original publisher>. All rights reserved.", and never, ever assumed to be any form of copyleft without an explicit statement declaring that. The publisher may not be the actual copyright owner, but they are most likely at least close to the owner (and with an established legal relationship) when that information is not reliably available.

Having said that, much of CERN's work has good academic notability, so I oppose this speedy on the basis that further consideration is needed, and it should be possible to quickly construct a non-infringing stub and hopefully a more complete article in a relatively short timescale. It certainly seems worthy of greater consideration to me.

--Murph9000 (talk) 10:42, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to solve the issues reported on top of the page. Below my comments:

1) This article needs attention from an expert in Physics.

I am an accelerator physicist who worked at the facility, and to my knowledge the information reported are correct and supported by the referenced scientific articles.

2) comply with layout guidelines + lead section does not adequately summarize key points of its contents

Although this page does not report many details on the facility, I believe it gives a quick overview of what it was and what it was used for.

3) needs more links to other articles.

I tried to add all relevant links to other wikipedia pages + many references to scientific articles.

--Gedivad (talk) 20:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the move request was: Moved. Being bold. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 22:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC) CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 22:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CTF3 (CERN) → CTF3 – This appears to be the primary topic over the airport, with several times more views (and many of the viewers of the airport article probably aren't looking for it by location identifier). Failing that, move to CLIC Test Facility 3 per WP:NATURALDIS * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.