Talk:Fine chemical

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from Abstract of Fine Chemicals - The Inductry and the Business ISBN 978-0-470-62767-9. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material . Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2011113010010141.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

On the copypasted text[edit]

See User:PeterRPollak. --vuo (talk) 20:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No answer in 11 days, so deleting. --vuo (talk) 22:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article?[edit]

Since this entire article is unsubstantiated assertions and is in places demonstrably license-violating copied text, I think we should consider deleting it altogether and let someone start from scratch if the article is truly needed, rather than trying to patch the existing skeleton into something defensible as an "encyclopedic" entry.

What do you think?

Riventree (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refimprove tag[edit]

Added tag. Article has few references, almost all from 2009-2011. Most aren't online resources. I don't have the knowledge or energy to attempt improving it, but it seems to need a bit of work. Reads like it was written by one person and hasn't been changed much for about ten years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Champlax (talk • contribs) 12:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]