→Definition: new section |
Bill le Conquérant (talk | contribs) →Article development: new section |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
The so-called NMO definition of legal metrology is not a definition, but rather an extract from "''The regulator’s statutory remit or objectives''" can be found [http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file53512.pdf on pg 11 here]. The accompoanying paragraph reads "''To provide the legal metrology infrastructure necessary to facilitate fair competition, support innovation, promote international trade and protect consumers, health and the environment.''" I have therefore removed it. [[User:Martinvl|Martinvl]] ([[User talk:Martinvl|talk]]) 07:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC) |
The so-called NMO definition of legal metrology is not a definition, but rather an extract from "''The regulator’s statutory remit or objectives''" can be found [http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file53512.pdf on pg 11 here]. The accompoanying paragraph reads "''To provide the legal metrology infrastructure necessary to facilitate fair competition, support innovation, promote international trade and protect consumers, health and the environment.''" I have therefore removed it. [[User:Martinvl|Martinvl]] ([[User talk:Martinvl|talk]]) 07:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Article development == |
|||
I have reverted a series of changes which, I believe, needed more thought and more discussion before being implemented. |
|||
The additions, in my view, were largely the unstructured addition of a large number of unexplained factoids, veiled in impenetrable language, and mostly gleaned from the organization's own website. |
|||
What we need are explanations in layman's language and a commentary to add meaning to the organization and for the facts that are significant and notable to be put into context and supported by third-party sources. |
|||
Let's first decide what the section heading should be, and then take it from there. |
|||
[[User:Bill le Conquérant|Bill le Conquérant]] ([[User talk:Bill le Conquérant|talk]]) 22:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:42, 6 February 2013
Measurement Stub‑class (defunct) | |||||||
|
Fair use rationale for Image:Oiml.jpg
Image:Oiml.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Definition
The so-called NMO definition of legal metrology is not a definition, but rather an extract from "The regulator’s statutory remit or objectives" can be found on pg 11 here. The accompoanying paragraph reads "To provide the legal metrology infrastructure necessary to facilitate fair competition, support innovation, promote international trade and protect consumers, health and the environment." I have therefore removed it. Martinvl (talk) 07:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Article development
I have reverted a series of changes which, I believe, needed more thought and more discussion before being implemented.
The additions, in my view, were largely the unstructured addition of a large number of unexplained factoids, veiled in impenetrable language, and mostly gleaned from the organization's own website.
What we need are explanations in layman's language and a commentary to add meaning to the organization and for the facts that are significant and notable to be put into context and supported by third-party sources.
Let's first decide what the section heading should be, and then take it from there.
Bill le Conquérant (talk) 22:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)