Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frontiers in... journal series: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→Frontiers in... journal series: we should just merge the main article here and start over again |
||
Line 74:
*'''Keep'''. Adequately sourced, and I think it's important to have this as a warning to readers that content in those journals might not be reliable. I was holding off on giving an opinion because in its earlier state (as a bare list) it wasn't clear that it made sense to fork this from the article about its publisher, but now that the article has been beefed up I no longer have that concern. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 16:22, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' With this many titles, it''s appropriate to have a separate list. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 03:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
::I don't understand the purpose of the main article anymore. This and that are basically the same thing, but that has a few corporate details that this one doesn't, and this one of course has The List. We basically have two chunks of content that we need to keep in sync which is just a stupid waste of time, especially on a journal that is controversial like this. [[User:DGG]] and [[User:David Eppstein]] your !votes make no sense in a meta-editing sense and are frankly disappointing. Headbomb pre-emptively did a SPLIT instead of just working the process. Way to reward shitty behavior and make more work for the commmunity. Hey maybe we should just merge the main article here. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]])
| |||