I'm speechless, this is probably the most comprehensive collection of information I've ever seen.
That must have been a lot of work! Thank you very much for this very useful resource!
I am absolutely thrilled😍
Thank you for your feedback.
This work was also made possible thanks to you.
WUS was one of the main sources.
By the way, don't hesitate to point out any error.
I may do a publication one day, but it will be to highlight this subject.
Not to turn it into an encyclopedic book.
For that, a website is perfect: with the possibility of correcting, completing, putting in a better photo, etc.
The following Guide has been compiled to amalgamate all current information regarding the НВЧ-30. It also includes my findings over many years of collecting and researching these watches. As much information as possible has been
vintagewatchinc.com
You may continue to include a link to my article in that section, but please remove the information and pictures you have used.
I started collecting information for myself.
And then I didn't always note the sources or origin of the photos.
I started doing it when I had the project of an online encyclopedia.
That's why some articles have sources (and some photos have indications of origin), others don't.
Please let me know if you need to add credits, I'll be happy to do so.
But I'm not going to take away information from English or Russian sites that I've translated into French (and often reworked).
We've all been looking for the information somewhere...
I added the link to your site, but your pdf study was already cited as the main source and
and I had originally indicated the origin of the photos under the photos
.
Using huge blocks of text from my original article and slightly changing them is pretty poor in my opinion.
Photos from my personal collection have also been used without my permission.
@MattBrace
All the information on the site comes from somewhere, and I've pointed out where it came from whenever I can.
Even in the body of the text there were formulas like "According to Matt Brace's study."
The point of the site is not simply to compile this information, but also to make a unified system of over 15,000 links enabling you to go from the watch to the mechanism, from the mechanism to the factory, and so and so and in all directions.
It's a contribution I make to our community, I don't earn anything from it (in fact, I pay for the site).
You could welcome this more positively.
I of course welcome new information on the subject of the NVCh-30 that adds to the knowledge pool, but this is not new.
You have simply rehashed large parts of my original article and added to them.
I would have been more positive if you had sort my permission first, as other forum members have done in the past.
You may consider this trivial but research and presentation of this new article took many years.
I am open to your suggestions on a way forward but I will defend the integrity of my work and my intellectual property.
There are 18,900 photos on this site, from thousands of sites, articles, forums etc., and I didn't ask for permission. The project would simply have been impossible.
I assumed that the people who put their info on the net for free would appreciate seeing their contribution integrated into this (non-commercial) reference set that showcased them (citing provenance).
I'm sorry you feel aggrieved, but I don't understand what you think you've lost.
I'd say you've gained, but the misunderstanding is such that I'm afraid you'll take it as irony or provocation, whereas that's the very spirit of my work.
I hope I've shed some light on my approach
A vast source of information indeed.
Now some proofreading; in the article about Komandirskie it says: "The very first ones were radium, then tritium, the luminosity of the former was often greater… "
None of the earliest Komandirskies I tested showed any sign of radioactivity. If you have different experiences, please let us know.
I don't know where this statement about the Komandirskie radioactive came from (some of the articles were written on the basis of notes taken before this site was planned - I didn't always note down the sources). In any case, it runs counter to, not only yours, but also my own conclusions: there goes the Zlatoust 191, no more soviet radioactive watches after 1960 (here)
I make the correction. Many thanks for helping me to improve this site: it's ten years from the first article to the last, and the collective body of knowledge (and my skills) have evolved.
Mr. @Hanoi I congratulate you on this great work of collecting information on Russian watchmaking. I simply find it a mistake that in many cases he has not attributed the information used in the writing of some chapters such as the one on the history of the Bostok watch factory where he uses images from my article and of which I had to ask permission to use them.
As the title of this post indicates, I would like to introduce the first wristwatch from the Chistopol factory produced in a case with fixed lugs and a logo on the dial. In case you did not know it…
www.safonagastrocrono.club
I strongly recommend that you polish these things up in your work, as there are many of us who have spent many hours researching and not compiling.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
WatchUSeek Watch Forums
posts
24M
members
619K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to watch owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about watch collections, displays, watch winders, accessories, classifieds, and more! We welcome all manufacturers including Casio G-Shock, OMEGA, Rolex, Breitling, Rolex and Tudor, Seiko, Grand Seiko and others.
….
