Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PhysicsOverflow: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:07, 5 June 2019

Latest revision as of 10:26, 27 August 2019

(10 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)

Line 1:

<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

===[[:PhysicsOverflow]]===

:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|W}}

<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''no consensus'''. Sourcing obviously is very weak, but nevertheless there is no consensus to delete. If no better sourcing comes about in, say, a month or so, no prejudice against relisting this at AfD. [[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 12:30, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

===[[:PhysicsOverflow]]===

<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>

:{{la|PhysicsOverflow}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PhysicsOverflow|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 June 418#{{anchorencode:PhysicsOverflow}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/PhysicsOverflow Stats]</span>)

:({{Find sources AFD|PhysicsOverflow}})

No sourcing at all, in [[WP:RS]]. Alexa rank of [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/physicsoverflow.org 1,197,749], and failure to meet [[WP:NWEB]] criteria. [[User:Störm|<span style="color: #1B1811;">'''Störm'''</span>]] [[User talk:Störm|<span style="color: #1B1811;">'''(talk)'''</span>]] 16:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Line 9 ⟶ 14:

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Websites|list of Websites-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Ceethekreator|Ceethekreator]] ([[User talk:Ceethekreator|talk]]) 18:36, 4 June 2019 (UTC)</small>

Has received coverage from at least two physics journals<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pallavi Sudhir |first1=Abhimanyu |last2=Knöpfel |first2=Rahel |title=PhysicsOverflow: A postgraduate-level physics Q&A site and open peer review system |journal=Asia Pacific Physics Newsletter |date=23 October 2015 |volume=04 |issue=011 |pages=53–55 |doi=10.1142/S2251158X15000193 |url=https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S2251158X15000193?src=recsys&journalCode=appn |accessdate=5 June 2019 |issn=2251-158X}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |url=https://www.pro-physik.de/restricted-files/86776 |accessdate=5 June 2019}}</ref> and one independent website.<ref>{{cite web |title=A theoretical physics FAQ |url=https://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~neum/physfaq/physics-faq.html |website=www.mat.univie.ac.at |accessdate=5 June 2019}}</ref> There are probably more sources like this out there. I don't think that Alexa rank is very relevant in this case: while PhysicsOverflow is notquite usednotable oramong known by laypeoplephysicists, it is quitenot notableused amongor physicistsknown by laypeople. --[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 01:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

{{reftalk}}

* '''Keep'''; the peer-review aspects alone make this a reliable source, and the notability of its' userbase make it notable. -- [[User:Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated|Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated]] ([[User talk:Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated|talk]]) 08:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />

<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]^{[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<span style="font-size: x-small;">1000</span>]]}</span> 06:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science|list of Science-related deletion discussions]]. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]^{[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<span style="font-size: x-small;">1000</span>]]}</span> 06:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)</small>

*'''Discussion:''' It ''is'' peer-review; the very fabric of Wikipedia! -- [[User:Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated|Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated]] ([[User talk:Shyam Has Your Anomaly Mitigated|talk]]) 04:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />

<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]^{[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<span style="font-size: x-small;">1000</span>]]}</span> 10:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->

*'''Weak keep''' The first of the three references in the list above is a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]]. The second is an interview with one of the site's creators, but that ''is'' evidence of the world (or at least the physics community) taking note, so it is a point in favor. The Alexa rank of a specialist website is pretty much an irrelevant datum. Likewise, whether the site itself counts as a "reliable source" is a topic for [[WP:RSN|a different place]] and doesn't really bear upon the question of keeping this page one way or the other. (After all, we have plenty of articles about publications that we do ''not'' consider reliable sources.) There are just enough verifiable items of evidence that physicists use and recommend the site that we can justifiably have a page about it. I might not object to a merge, if a suitable target were proposed, but that is also a discussion for another day and place. [[User:XOR&#39;easter|XOR&#39;easter]] ([[User talk:XOR&#39;easter|talk]]) 13:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

*The sources cited above are problematic. As mentioned, the first two are directly from the creators of the WWW site themselves, one being an interview and the other being a newsletter announcement from those creators. The third simply does not provide any information about this subject ''at all'', upon reading it. The sources cited in the article are equally problematic. Supporting citations for several claims are simply pointers to conversations amongst people on the site itself, from which readers are supposed to make original inferences; and the other sourcing in the article is not any better. Looking elsewhere, I cannot find any reliable independent sources from which to make an article properly. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 13:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' Fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NWEB]] due to lacking sustained independent [[WP:SIGCOV]]. All of the sources in the article and provided here in the AfD have serious deficiencies as outlined by Uncle G above. They just do not in any way get this article off the ground and over any notability guidelines. I would also note this article was created and fostered by a prolific [[WP:SPA]]. The likely COI here means this article should be swiftly uprooted from the encyclopedia so as not to reward corruption on Wikipedia. [[User:Newshunter12|Newshunter12]] ([[User talk:Newshunter12|talk]]) 08:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

{{clear}}

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>