Jump to content

User talk:Randykitty

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TrueBRONC (talk | contribs) at 14:48, 17 December 2014 (→‎Robert S. Nelsen Wiki page: new section). 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, please add your comments at the very bottom and use a section heading (e.g., by using the "+" tab, or, depending on your settings, the "new section" tab at the top of this page). I will respond on this page unless specifically requested otherwise. I dislike talk-back templates and fragmented discussions. If I post on your page you may assume that I will watch it for a response. If you post here I will assume the same (and that you lost interest if you stop following the discussion).

IF YOU CAME HERE BECAUSE I DELETED AN ARTICLE THAT YOU CREATED OR WORKED ON: Please see WP:REFUND first. Thanks.

Wikipedia is no place for humour.
Everything is very serious here and we are all terrifically important.

COGEBI

Hello Randykitty, you deleted the page I created about COGEBI (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COGEBI&action=edit&redlink=1). We tried to change content to be more neutral and removed text taken directly from COGEBI website - I would like to ask you if the content is now ok and the page can be published - new version of text is on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ondrej.sotek/COGEBI

We are able to obtain copyright permission about published text from Cogebi, a.s.

I am sorry if I am doing something wrong, I am new user on wikipedia and trying to publish my first article. COGEBI is our customer, we created website cogebi.com.

Best regards, Ondrej Sotek. Ondrej.sotek (talk) 09:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, I had a look at your draft but am afraid that it is completely unacceptable. It is promotional and completely unsourced. From the above I understand that you are involved with this company. Not only does this indicate that you have a conflict of interest, but it may also make it difficult for you to write objectively on this subject. There's a welcome message on your talk page listing several helpful links. I suggest you read them all (as well as those that I linked to above) before continuing editing in this area. Hope this helps. --Randykitty (talk) 09:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Cotter

Hi, since I don't know if the system will ping you or not (sometimes it fails to do so), I am letting you know that if you have time, to come for a chat at the current article regarding its notability. I have found zero mentioning of her on GS, so maybe she will be listed in one of those deep sources. Will be glad to hear any input regarding this issue. Thanks.--Mishae (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The way I understand the doc of the cite web template (which concurs with the link you gave on linkrot), "deadurl=no" is used if a link is still life but has been archived pre-emptively. "Deadurl=no" then causes the original link to be used as main link. If the original link is dead, then "deadurl=yes" will cause the archived link to become the main link. If both are dead, the whole thing should be handled as normal dead links, I think, although I cannot imagine that to happen very often. --Randykitty (talk) 10:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Its odd, because I looked at Barack Obama article and there refs 150 and onward were not dead yet it still carried deadurl=yes. Was it a mistake? If so, why no editor took action?--Mishae (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the users didn't respond to my question so I am confused now. However, I did discovered something interesting... There is no need to mark deadurl as yes in order for it to switch around. You simply can remove deadurl parameter altogether and you will have the same effect. :)--Mishae (talk) 01:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Manchester University Press, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palgrave. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CAB Abstracts coverage

Here is a link and formatted ref for your list if you like for CAB Abstracts

  • CAB Abstracts coverage list; to cite: <ref name= CABAB>{{cite web |url= http://www.cabi.org/publishing-products/online-information-resources/cab-abstracts/ |title= Serials cited |work= [[CAB Abstracts]] |publisher= [[CABI (organisation)|CABI]] |accessdate=2024-08-14}}</ref>

Thanks for all your contributions. - - MrBill3 (talk) 23:41, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've probably already figured out a couple of clicks and you can check other CABI databases ie:Global Health and the tweaks for the ref are minor. Where are you getting the impact factors? - - MrBill3 (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a decent publisher (i.e., not a predatory one), I just take it from their website and source it to the JCR. I have yet to see Springer, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, and such to make a mistake. Some journals don't list their IF and in that case I get it directly from the JCR itself (I have access to a lot of databases and journals). --Randykitty (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had seen you add IF for some I couldn't find on journal or publisher sites. I suspected you had access to JCR. I have a few databases at my disposal. If you could let me know which are most useful for finding info on journals that would be appreciated. Also any tips for finding sources on journals would be great. For the most part whenever I search a journal title I get the content of the journal. Thanks for some clear and specific ES's that have helped me out a lot. Thanks for the user rights too. Does this mean I can set has rationale to yes on images I upload, or should I let others do that? Best. - - MrBill3 (talk) 08:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)cmt[reply]
To start with the latter, I think anyone can set "has rationale" to yes, but in any case, you should be able to do it now. There are rarely any sources for journals. Occasionally, a new journal gets reviewed in the Times Higher Education (for example, Genes, Brain and Behavior) or Nature (journal), which are great sources, but those are exceptions. Ironically, we often have good sources if the journal is low quality or commits an error (for example: Social Text or OMICS Publishing Group). That's why most articles on journals remain rather bare-bones, because all we can use is their own website and indexing info. --Randykitty (talk) 08:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So I am guessing Web of Science isn't an abstracting/indexing service and that is why you have deleted it a couple of places? - - MrBill3 (talk) 11:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Autochecked

Hey Randyktty! I was observing the user rights log and seen you added the 'autochecked user' to MrBill3. Just to note that the user group is no longer active and is redundant. As Wikipedia:Autochecked users states: Currently there are 0 autochecked users; if there are any, they must be removed by an administrator from the list. Best, ///EuroCarGT 17:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Big game

You just did a speedy deletion:

"09:10, 15 December 2014 Randykitty (talk | contribs) deleted page Bali Mauladad (Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria A7, G11)"

I was about to contest those tags as they were inappropriate. A7 was not applicable as, apart from the general notability of the subject as a prominent big game hunter, there was a specific claim to fame in that they were the only non-white to be admitted to the white hunters society - the East African Professional Hunter's Association. This was backed up by two citations. They also had some prominence in the Safari Rally too. G11 was inappropriate as the subject is long dead and so their life is just of historical interest now - a larger-than-life figure from a bygone age.

So, please restore the article so that it may be developed further. Note that the young lady who started the article was being shown how to edit Wikipedia. As she is an Asian female, such hostility to her efforts does not serve our diversity efforts well. She was recruited at a Science Museum outreach event and will be introduced to Jimmy Wales at a forthcoming event this week. It would be a shame to have this casting a shadow on the occasion. If there is continued doubt about the merits of the topic, then the AFD process might better be used so that it is given a more thorough examination. Andrew D. (talk) 09:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have restored it, although I don't really see any notability, nor do I agree about any claims for fame. G11 has nothing to do with whether the subject is alive or long dead or whether something is commercial or not. In any case, perhaps it's better to move it to draft space so that it can be developed to an acceptable level, before moving it back to main space. Let me know if you need help with that. --Randykitty (talk) 10:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. From what I've seen so far, I'm expecting to find more coverage of the subject in newspapers of the period but don't currently have access to Highbeam to check this yet. I'll do what I can this morning though I have other plans too. And I find that someone has just nominated my own transferable skill for speedy deletion! That is a highly notable topic in education and there are thousands of hits in Google Scholar but I now have to waste some more time proving the obvious. Now transferable skill is a topic where one has to be more careful about G11 concerns because there are lots of people currently engaged in promoting the idea. I just can't see it for big game hunters though as they seem mostly an obsolete profession. Andrew D. (talk) 10:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of Global Health"

I see you deleted an article on Journal of Global Health (I am talking about the one by University of Edinburgh, there is another from Columbia University The Journal of Global Health. I am proposing recreating the article. Looking at Ulrichsweb I find it is peer reviewed/refereed. It is abstracted/indexed in CABI databases "Global Health" (verified) and "Nutrition and Food Sciences Database" (verified) and CINAHL (verified) and PubMed and PubMed Central (NLM id 101578780) the National Institute of Standards and Technology Virtual Library as well as PubMed Central Canada and Europe and EBSCO Health Policy Reference Center. I am assuming that the Directory of Open Access journals provides no notability as merely a directory. WorldCat shows 150 libraries holding it but for an open access online journal many libraries do not purchase paper copies. In this article the Journal of Global Health assesses itself. This article has been cited 26 times according to Google Scholar (also cited in WP Sepsis). The citations include major journals and reflect an international base. This article was cited by] The Lancet, BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth and USAID publication. This article cited by 47 including some pretty major publications. Well I have presented a case, what do you think? - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • None of the databases that you mention are particularly selective. PubMed is automatic for any journal in PubMed Central, which is fairly easy to get into, too. It's not in MEDLINE or other selective databases. WorldCat is rather useless for an OA journal. So in short, I think you'd better spend your valuable time on more notable journals, enough of those are still without articles, than on this (at best) borderline case... --Randykitty (talk)

Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/CloseAFD

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/CloseAFD. I am inviting you to try the improved script! It makes relisting and closing debates much easier and now works in Vector. Support has been added to deal with some incompatibility it had with other gadgets (like wikEd). It also makes use of the new relist count parameter in {{Relist}} to make that process easier. Please do check out the description page and give it a try! Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 16:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Robert S. Nelsen Wiki page

Hi Randykitty, This is in reference to the following link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Robert_S._Nelsen I have made several edits. Can you please review and let me know if you can remove the over linked banner on top? If not, can you please fix the page as I am relatively new to Wikipedia and learning as I'm going. Thank you in anticipation. TrueBRONC (talk) 14:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Randykitty&oldid=638497287"