User talk:Nsk92: Difference between revisions
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:OK, thanks! [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92#top|talk]]) 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC) |
:OK, thanks! [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92#top|talk]]) 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
== AfD == |
== AfD == |
||
[[User:Nsk92]], instead of accusing people of creating autobiography and sockpuppetry accounts only on the basis of narrow observations please read carefully what they write. And never lose your neutrality (by writing on their talk pages that "they are in awkward situation", etc.) even if your arguments against someone's article got destroyed. Your arguments against my article "Vugar Ismailov" were as follows. |
[[User:Nsk92]], instead of accusing people of creating autobiography and sockpuppetry accounts only on the basis of narrow observations, please, read carefully what they write. And never lose your neutrality (by writing on their talk pages that "they are in awkward situation", etc.) even if your arguments against someone's article got destroyed. Your arguments against my article "Vugar Ismailov" were as follows. |
||
1) ''All the references given are to his own work.'' |
1) ''All the references given are to his own work.'' |
||
Revision as of 07:48, 11 September 2016
/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Nsk92, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Rob13Talk 06:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
- OK, thanks! Nsk92 (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
AfD
User:Nsk92, instead of accusing people of creating autobiography and sockpuppetry accounts only on the basis of narrow observations, please, read carefully what they write. And never lose your neutrality (by writing on their talk pages that "they are in awkward situation", etc.) even if your arguments against someone's article got destroyed. Your arguments against my article "Vugar Ismailov" were as follows.
1) All the references given are to his own work. Right, but this can be easily corrected following Boorey1's advice in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vugar_Ismailov.
2) Very low citability, both in MathSciNet and in GoogleScholar. Just for your attention: It is wrong to assess mathematicians only on the ground of their citation counts. Please look at http://www.nature.com/news/the-focus-on-bibliometrics-makes-papers-less-useful-1.16706 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Declaration_on_Research_Assessment.
3) Nothing else to indicate passing WP:PROF. Wrong. Vugar Ismailov is the only Azerbaijani mathematician who has the Erdős number as low as 2.
4) Based on the username of the article's creator, appears to be a WP:AUTO case. No evidence. I could have easily used any other username. I did not know the rules and took the username very similar to the title of article I created. Vugaris (talk) 7:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)