- 1 Van Kampen diagram drawing
- 2 Autopatrolled granted
- 3 Categories
- 4 GScholar question
- 5 Math Powerland
- 6 RfC for page patroller qualifications
- 7 discuss for page Bruce Q. Lan
- 8 New page reviewer granted
- 9 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
- 10 New Page Reviewer - RfC
- 11 New Page Review - newsletter
- 12 Contesting Deletion of the page on Anisha Acharya
- 13 Harringay Tigers
- 14 BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
- 15 New Page Review - newsletter #2
- 16 Weigh-in Needed from Eds with Science Background
- 17 Extended confirmed protection policy RfC
- 18 mail
- 19 New Page Review - newsletter No.2
- 20 New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections
- 21 New Page Review - newsletter No.3
Van Kampen diagram drawing
Hi Nsk92, I just wanted to ask you how you drew the van Kampen diagram here  and if I could do it in a similar way. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:37, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
- It was a while ago, but as I remember, I drew that figure using Xfig. At the time my office computer had a Linux operating system and running Xfig was not a problem. It is also possible to install Xfig on a Mac or a Windows computer, but that requires a bit of extra work. compared to Linux-based operating systems. Nsk92 (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
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)
Hi Nsk92, categories of the article Vugar Ismailov are mainly Azerbaijani-related. If any category is not adequate, I can remove it. Ismailov manages the Proceedings of the Institute of Mathematics and Mechanics, NAS of Azerbaijan. This is the only journal of Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, which is indexed in Web of Science. He also serves as an editor of leading mathematics journals published in Azerbaijan (such as Azerbaijan Journal of Mathematics, etc.). He is also the Azerbaijani scientist with the lowest Erdos number. Thank you for reading. Vmash (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- Look, whomever you are: These arguments should have been brought up in the AfD, before the rain of sockpuppetry and other disruption came down. Incidentally, having Erdos number 2 is not an indicator of notability. WP:PROF explicitly says that having a small collaboration distance from a famous researcher, in particular having a small Erdos number, does not make one academically notable. However, the arguments about editorships of journals are serious and substantive arguments, and, had they been brought up in the AfD at the proper time, it is quite possible that the article might have been kept. However, now that it has been deleted, you cannot just keep re-creating it using obvious wp:sock accounts -- it will just be speedily deleted again. The correct procedure in this situation is for the User:AynuraJafarova account to wait until the expiration of the current two-week block on that account. Then, once unblocked, User:AynuraJafarova (while logged in as User:AynuraJafarova ) can place a request at WP:DRV to have the Vugar Ismailov re-created and to specifically raise new notability arguments that were not presented in the AfD, namely the arguments about journal editorships. There will be then a discussion at WP:DRV and if a consensus is obtained to allow re-creation of the article in the mainspace, then the article will be allowed to be re-created. That is the proper procedure to follow in this situation. But, if more new sock accounts try again and again re-create the article in the mainspace, not only will it keep getting speedily deleted, but the User:AynuraJafarova will be indefinitely blocked (instead of the current two weeks block). Nsk92 (talk) 11:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I'm wondering if you could help me figure out the h-index for "Ronald Smelser", as I can see you have expertise in this area (followed here from an AfD discussion). I've been trying to do a draft for a while, and I wonder if he'd qualify under WP:PROF or WP:NAUTHOR. He is the author, with a co-author, of the The Myth of the Eastern Front. Help figuring this out would be appreciated, as Smelser apparently does not have an individual profile on GScholar. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- This is one of those cases where GScholar displayed the results in a particularly unhelpful manner:. First, one needs to disregard the results related the physicist Ronald E Smelser, such items number 1 and 2 in the GScholar search. Another problem here is that for some reason after that GScholar does not display the items in the decreasing order of the citation hits, and one needs to reorder them manually. When I did that myself, for the citation hits related to Ronald Smelser you describe above, I got: 91, 49, 36, 36, 34, 28, 23, 22, 21, 21, 13, 12, 9, 9, 6,..., which gives him a GScholar h-index of 11 (if I did not miss/mix up anything). That's actually quite high for a historian. In general, for someone in the humanities, h-index is not a particularly good indicator of academic notability per WP:PROF and it is better to look at other factors, such as, for example, reviews of books that he has written, library holdings of his books, editorships of journals/books, etc. Still, to the extent you may want to invoke h-index in the context of WP:PROF, a GScholar h-index of 11 is fairly high for a historian. Nsk92 (talk) 09:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note also that according to this he is a past President of the German Studies Association, which is also confirmed here; that's another indicator of academic notability per WP:PROF#C6. Nsk92 (talk) 12:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm contesting the deletion. This is not vandalism or a hoax. I'm a newb at editing wikipedia. I am looking for sources to site and plan on expanding the article. Steveengelhardt (talk) 02:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
RfC for page patroller qualifications
Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:04, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
discuss for page Bruce Q. Lan
Hello, Nsk92, the website AADCU Has been exsited for over 10 years, now seems a dead link,but maybe still can trace some log on google, AADCU was a very known web source in the architectural community, now i heard they are in rebuild process, so should I delet the link source in the article about Bruce Q. Lan, please advice... Thanks! Susanzone77 (talk) 08:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hello Nsk92. Your account has been added to the "
New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.
- Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
- Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
- Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- PS: A detailed summary/check list has been deliberately not made because that is then all people read and they then do not bother to read the important details. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Just been uploading a page pander rock duo. Having had 500 international interviews it warrants to have a page with details for people
Captain raw (talk) 16:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
New Page Reviewer - RfC
Hi Nsk92. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:48, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Contesting Deletion of the page on Anisha Acharya
Hi Nsk92 - As a part of Wikipedia Asia Month, I am participating in Women in Red campaign. Anisha Acharya is an Indian woman with significant achievement that deserves to the mentioned. Day One is not her only short movie and her other works have also been recognized. Thanks! --Parul Thakur (talk) 04:59, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
You wanted to get in touch? About the review??
Email: The Wikipedia page Harringay Tigers (speedway) has been changed on 27 November 2016 by Nsk92, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harringay_Tigers_(speedway) for the current revision.
Editor's summary: -
Contact the editor: mail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Nsk92 wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nsk92
- No, not particularly. I simply reviewed your new article yesterday as a part of doing NPP. Everything looked in order, for a basic stub-class article. Nsk92 (talk) 13:39, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
Weigh-in Needed from Eds with Science Background
The issue of "junk journals" has come-up in a scientist-related AfD, e.g. my latest comment. I don't think this is receiving due consideration from many of the panelists, but would appreciate a heads-up in case I'm over-emphasizing this. Thanks. Agricola44 (talk) 20:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC).
Extended confirmed protection policy RfC
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))
- Despite its fairly high impact factor, the Bulletin of AMS is not comparable to journals like Annals of Mathematics, Inventiones and the Journal of AMS in terms of prestige. Bulletin of AMS is specifically dedicated to publishing expository/survey articles and book reviews, and does not publish original research as such. That's why BAMS has fairly high impact factor: the survey/expository articles published there are frequently used as general background references. Publishing a paper in BLMS provides a useful service to mathematical community, but it is not comparable to publishing a paper in Annals of Mathematics, Inventiones or the Journal of AMS, which only accept papers proving particularly important new mathematical results. Bauer's paper in BAMS is an expository paper on constructive mathematics. Nsk92 (talk) 14:38, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections
Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)