Jump to content

User talk:Guillaume2303

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hoursneck (talk | contribs) at 10:50, 8 September 2011 (→‎h-index). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Hi, and welcome to my User Talk page! For new discussions, I prefer you add your comments at the very bottom and use a section heading (e.g., by using the "+" tab at the top of this page). I will respond on this page unless specifically requested otherwise.


Berghahn Journals

Hello, referring to Asia_Pacific_World, thanks for the editing, but I would like to understand why you still call for a deletion and why is no good to keep the editorial board on the page.Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berghahnpaolo (talkcontribs) 20:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subjects can have an article on WP if they are notable (a concept with a particular meaning here, which has nothing to do with "good", "bad", "worthy", or anything like that). The relevant guidelines are WP:GNG and WP:NJournals and Asia_Pacific_World does not fulfill those criteria. Lists of editorial boards are routinely deleted, because they go against WP:NOTADIRECTORY and because editorial board members seldomly do more for a journal than lending their names and reputations. Board members can be mentioned if there are independent sources that say something about this (for example, in some cases of Elsevier journals where editorial board members left in protest against too-high subscription rates to subsequently establish an open access journal in the same field). I have tagged the articles that you have created for the Wikiproject Academic journals (see their talk pages) and the banner contains a link to the guide for writing journal articles, with many good tips on how to write a neutral article that is unlikely to be challenged and deleted. Hope this helps. --Crusio (talk) 09:20, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help and sorry for the extra-work you need to do! I am very bad in designing the pages, but my main concern was that they weren't deleted!P — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berghahnpaolo (talkcontribs) 16:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Could you please take another look at it, and give your comment on my fuller explanation DGG ( talk ) 07:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit on h-index. I seem to have acquired a stalker who follows me around reverting my edits. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC). Please, do not delete the changes I did on h-index regarding the online Scholar H-Index Batch Calculator. It is proven and it is quite used by the Italian Academics as you can see it on the website. Thanks.[reply]