Talk:Corian

message: I have removed the "Corian Characteristics Video" because I really dont think it serves as anything other than a link to another website.  The info density in the video is really low.  Manoamuppet (talk) 09:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Editors are reminded of our Verifiability and Reliable Sources policies before adding potentially unsourced, incorrect information to articles. There is a spec sheet available on the DuPont website. ~Kylu (u|t)  21:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow, all of those things you  removed seem like valid and useful information. Perhaps some clarification was in order, but removal? I somehow doubt the original poster is one of your DuPont P.R. subordinates, so why the deletion?72.237.251.40 18:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The removal was necessary because all information was incorrect. HalcyonStrings 14:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit removal

message: The meganite or whatever it's called portion seems out of place. Would a normal person think this belonged here, or just a salesperson who's trying to win everybody over? God help us as we move in the brave new era of corporate wiki-awareness.72.237.251.40 18:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A better alternative would be a comparison chart for solid surface and also another one for different types of countertops. HalcyonStrings 14:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I think mentioning analogs to corian is acceptable since there is no generic article for acrylic countertop materials (or whatever the appropriate generic term for the product is).  When I encountered the content, it was very spammy, and I fixed that.  More recently (IOW, below) someone suggested transforming/moving this to a generic article, which may be a good solution. -Verdatum (talk) 17:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  A generic article now exists at Solid surface. Cullen328 (talk) 18:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Just wondering if there should be a mention of the related DuPont Zodiaq compound? How do they compare to each other? --24.249.108.133 19:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, a comparison chart would be better.  Corian isn't Zodiaq and I don't think information on Zodiaq here is appropriate. HalcyonStrings 14:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any info on DuPont Zodiaq? 

message: It seems that this article would be better moved to a generic name, seeing as it also has some details of competing product. Is there a term used in the trade to refer to all of these? in Australia people some people refer to it as Laminex, regardless of the actual material or manufacturer. The name "Solid surfacing" seems a little too generic though. Kevin 05:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this would be doable.  Based on the "competition" section, quite a few manufacturers have analogs for this material, and there is currently very little information that is explicitly specific to Dupont Corian. -Verdatum (talk) 17:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger / move 

message: All that competition stuff is really clunky. Should be removed, and Corian join its competition in a category of surfaces or acrylics or whatever. -- Terry J. Gardner (talk) 18:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I propose to move all the competitor information to Solid surface.  This article is about DuPont Corian, not about its competition, and the size of this section gives undue weight to the competition, in my opinion.  For the record, I work with solid surface materials, but am not a DuPont employee, or an employee of any of its distributors.  If other brands are notable, articles can be written about them. Cullen328 (talk) 18:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competition 

message: I have completely updated this article and changed the organization of the content.  I have added a lot of references which were lacking.  Hopefully all will enjoy.Claireunderwood (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2014 Update 

message: "To marble as MDF is to wood" -- this is not factual and sounds just as coming from an advertising. This statement could have a place in the encyclopedia, but would then have be explained a bit more. That's my opinion.--Freediving-beava (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placed Advert tag