Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Algorithms (journal): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:28, 6 August 2018

Revision as of 10:43, 7 August 2018

Line 3:

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

:{{la|Algorithms (journal)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Algorithms (journal)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 JulyAugust 307#{{anchorencode:Algorithms (journal)}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Algorithms_(journal) Stats]</span>)

:({{Find sources AFD|Algorithms (journal)}})

There are really no independent sources on this journal; plus, the company that publishes it, [[MDPI]], has come under fire as a publisher of predatory journals (see [https://www.ashclinicalnews.org/features/predatory-publishing-dark-side-open-access-movement/ this]). Thus, the information about being "peer-reviewed" is almost certainly false, and demonstrates the unreliability of this article. Because of this, it should be deleted under our [[WP:GNG|general notability criteria]] and our [[WP:V|verifiability policy]]. [[User:RileyBugz|<span style="color:#2D3D67">RileyBugz</span>]]^{[[User talk:RileyBugz|<span style="color:#D7000B">私に叫ぼう</span>]]}_{[[Special:Contributions/RileyBugz|<span style="color:#D7000B">私の編集</span>]]} 02:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Line 24:

::Now this is a completely different rationale than that given in the original deletion request. I could agree with you if we did a similar purge on ''all'' journal articles, regardless of what we guess about the quality of the journal, basing deletion decisions solely on ''your'' criterion. -- [[User:Nsda|Nsda]] ([[User talk:Nsda|talk]]) 15:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

:::{{Ping|Nsda}}, firstly there is nothing preventing later editors providing additional deletion rationales to that originally offered. Secondly, your claim is a rather dramatic rebuttal of [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS]]. NJOURNAL is an essay, and I'm none too sure about the suitability of using it rather than purely than [[WP:GNG]] (which definitely sets out firmer Sig Cov/reliable source requirements than are met in this article/discussion). [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 16:28, 6 August 2018 (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, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</span>]]</span></small> 10:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Algorithms (journal)]]</noinclude></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->