User talk:Journals88
Welcome![edit]
|
conflict of interest[edit]
Re: conflict of interest on journals: Use the article history to find some recently-created ones, and model after those. If you keep it to a stub with bare publishing information and a couple of sentences describing what the journal does, it won't be a COI. Just make sure the journal is a real, peer-reviewed journal. If it's not, it probably shouldn't be on the list in the first place. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 17:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
The advice davidwr gives is the same as i would give, and I will also be pleased to help you. But also make sure you do not include the standard PR -style text. The sort of material used on the journal web site is almost certainly not suited for an encyclopedia--only factual language is acceptable describing the journal. You can list its principal field, but the usual paragraph on its aims is considered advertising copy, as is a broad listing of all the related fields of science. Similarly saying that it will be of interest to all researchers in chemistry (etc). --that sort of thing is usually obvious.
- What else do we want: actually, quite a lot there are many useful things you can say: * The name & institution of the editor in chief, but usually just the editor in chief. Some publications with extremely notable past editors in chief should list them, but it's usually excessive. We use this information to establish the notability of the scientists concerned--any ed. in chief of a major journal will get a WP article. Not the whole board. * You can say whether its published from the US or the UK. *You can say if its included in major online services beyond your own, such as ebsco or proquest & if there is an embargo, as there usually is for journals like these, how long it is. *You can give the circulation. *You can and should give the major indexing services. Not all the little ones like Aluminum Abstracts, but: ChemAbs, Web of Science, Scopus, Inspec, Compendex, Medline/PubMed, Biosis, Psych Info, or the analogous ones in other fields. This is a major factor in establishing notability for a journal. *You can and should give the impact factor. The current ones are the 06s. Only the most recent should be given. It can also give the rank, but give it as 4th out of the 80 journals in ___. It means more than just 4th, because 4th could be 4th out of 8. Do not give the price; do not give the purchase options.
- I'll look at your articles and make suggestions. DGG (talk) 02:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- sure. I have made a page for you, User talk:Journals88/sandbox. Just add one there as a start, and let me know. We have an expanded group of help pages that you may want to read, Wikipedia:Business FAQ. It also would be a good idea to start your WP:User:88 page, and give your name and affiliation. If you want to receive emails from other people at Wikipedia, activate your email from the user preferences. DGG (talk) 17:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edits[edit]
Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 20:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
=the two articles[edit]
I edited them a little further, and I see no reason why you should not now introduce them. (Lists of all the topics covered in a journals are usually not a good idea, especially when they are reasonably obvious). 18:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm a bit puzzled about your page blanking. Article pages should not be blank. If the redirect is incorrect, you can fix it. Or, you can drop me a note and I'll fix it. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Journal of Physics D Proposed for Deletion[edit]
Proposed deletion of Journal of Physics D[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Journal of Physics D, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Angrymansr (talk) 01:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Journal of Optics[edit]
Why did you move Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics to Journal of Optics? I reverted your edits, mostly for technical reasons,[1] but also because I'm not entirely sure why it should be moved in the first place.
- ^ The "proper" way to do this move would have been to move Journal of Optics to Journal of Optics (disambiguation), then delete Journal of Optics (which require administrator intervention), then move Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics to Journal of Optics. This way revision histories are preserved.
I can take care of the technical details if we agree to move the article. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 14:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Biofabrication[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Biofabrication requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Crusio (talk) 16:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Reply[edit]
Hello. You have a new message at Rjanag's talk page.
Disambiguation link notification[edit]
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- IOP Publishing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Chinese, Japanese, EPL, Biomedical Materials and Journal of Optics
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)