Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy-Safety and Energy-Economy (journal): Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Randykitty (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
*'''Keep''', clearly notable. <span class="vcard"><span class="nickname">[[User:Zambelo|Zambelo]]</span>; [[User talk:Zambelo|talk]]</span> 11:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''', clearly notable. <span class="vcard"><span class="nickname">[[User:Zambelo|Zambelo]]</span>; [[User talk:Zambelo|talk]]</span> 11:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
:*Hi Zambelo, I'm glad to see that your recent topic ban at ANI has motivated you to go outside of your usual haunts. We can use more editors working on academic journals! --[[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 18:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
:*Hi Zambelo, I'm glad to see that your recent topic ban at ANI has motivated you to go outside of your usual haunts. We can use more editors working on academic journals! --[[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 18:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
Thanks [[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]]! Glad to see you back hard at work ensuring other people's misguided efforts to collaborate on a Worldwide Encyclopedia Project are managed to within your scrupulous guidelines - I'm just (pleasantly) surprised you haven't brought more conscientious editors along to force the issue this time - we can use productive editors who can stick to due process without pushing a POV. <span class="vcard"><span class="nickname">[[User:Zambelo|Zambelo]]</span>; [[User talk:Zambelo|talk]]</span> 17:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment''' I strongly disagree with all of the above "keep" !votes, none of which, in my opinion, is even slightly based in policy. The "West-European/US oriented selective databases" certainly do not exclude journals in other languages and contain journals publishing in Japanese, Chinese, and, indeed, also Russian. The own national citation index ([[Russian Science Citation Index]]) is not selective at all. Accepting indexing of journals in the RSCI would actually ''create'' a cultural bias: English-language journals need to be included in a selective database, but Russian-language journals only need to be included in the RSCI. The journal under discussion here has '''no''' impact whatsoever. Searching Google Scholar (not using the above link containing the dab) [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Energy-Safety+and+Energy-Economy%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 under its English title] gives a grand total of 3 cites. Searching for its [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22%D0%AD%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B0%CC%81%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C+%D0%B8+%D1%8D%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%B5%CC%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 Russian title] lists a few hundred articles published in this journal (showing, by the way, that GS indexed journals in Russian), none of which has been cited, ''not even in Russian journals''. In short, we have ''no'' sources discussing this journal (and for those claiming there is a cultural bias at work here, I would like to remind everybody here that sources in Russian are perfectly acceptable), we have ''no'' inclusion in databases that are even remotely selective, and we have ''no'' evidence that this journal has any significant impact. I fail to see how anybody can argue that this journal is notable. --[[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 18:45, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' I strongly disagree with all of the above "keep" !votes, none of which, in my opinion, is even slightly based in policy. The "West-European/US oriented selective databases" certainly do not exclude journals in other languages and contain journals publishing in Japanese, Chinese, and, indeed, also Russian. The own national citation index ([[Russian Science Citation Index]]) is not selective at all. Accepting indexing of journals in the RSCI would actually ''create'' a cultural bias: English-language journals need to be included in a selective database, but Russian-language journals only need to be included in the RSCI. The journal under discussion here has '''no''' impact whatsoever. Searching Google Scholar (not using the above link containing the dab) [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Energy-Safety+and+Energy-Economy%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 under its English title] gives a grand total of 3 cites. Searching for its [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22%D0%AD%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B0%CC%81%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C+%D0%B8+%D1%8D%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%B5%CC%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 Russian title] lists a few hundred articles published in this journal (showing, by the way, that GS indexed journals in Russian), none of which has been cited, ''not even in Russian journals''. In short, we have ''no'' sources discussing this journal (and for those claiming there is a cultural bias at work here, I would like to remind everybody here that sources in Russian are perfectly acceptable), we have ''no'' inclusion in databases that are even remotely selective, and we have ''no'' evidence that this journal has any significant impact. I fail to see how anybody can argue that this journal is notable. --[[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 18:45, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - It meets [[WP:GNG|notability]]. <b>[[User:Karlhard|<span style="font-family:Segoe Script;color:#ff000f">Karlhard</span>]]</b> <small>[[User talk:Karlhard|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:#07517C"><sup>(talk to me)</span></sup>]]</small> 00:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - It meets [[WP:GNG|notability]]. <b>[[User:Karlhard|<span style="font-family:Segoe Script;color:#ff000f">Karlhard</span>]]</b> <small>[[User talk:Karlhard|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:#07517C"><sup>(talk to me)</span></sup>]]</small> 00:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:57, 18 October 2014
- Energy-Safety and Energy-Economy (journal) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources, only one minor (and also non-notable) award. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Randykitty (talk) 18:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 20:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 20:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 20:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 21:26, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is one of the places where Randykitty and I disagree. The West-European/US oriented selective databases are irrelevant for Russian titles. It's included in its own nation citation index, and that is sufficient. There's no other practical way for us to avoid cultural bias in this field. DGG ( talk ) 00:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: I strongly agreed with DGG on this note. Inclusion in its country citation index is enough. Wikicology (talk) 00:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep, essentially per rationale of Wikicology, above. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 01:22, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Editor. Not sure if adding my comment here is correct, sorry about that. I am one of the editors of this journal and I wonder if you could give us a chance and keep the Energy-Safety and Energy-Economy article. I do not agree that the journal is “Not indexed in any selective databases.” Global Impact Factor, SHERPA, Higher Attestation Commission (the Russian leading periodicals database) are selective databases. Published papers are included in the largest bibliographical catalog worldcat.org. Members of the journal’s editorial board are doing all their best to improve the publication and are making it an open access bilingual journal. The managing editor became the Editor of the Month http://gaudeamusacademia.com/forum/topics/editor-of-the-month-april-2014-svetlana-zernes?xg_source=activity. Thank you for your understanding.73.43.243.35 (talk) 05:59, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep per DGG. James500 (talk) 07:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep, clearly notable. Zambelo; talk 11:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Zambelo, I'm glad to see that your recent topic ban at ANI has motivated you to go outside of your usual haunts. We can use more editors working on academic journals! --Randykitty (talk) 18:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Randykitty! Glad to see you back hard at work ensuring other people's misguided efforts to collaborate on a Worldwide Encyclopedia Project are managed to within your scrupulous guidelines - I'm just (pleasantly) surprised you haven't brought more conscientious editors along to force the issue this time - we can use productive editors who can stick to due process without pushing a POV. Zambelo; talk 17:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I strongly disagree with all of the above "keep" !votes, none of which, in my opinion, is even slightly based in policy. The "West-European/US oriented selective databases" certainly do not exclude journals in other languages and contain journals publishing in Japanese, Chinese, and, indeed, also Russian. The own national citation index (Russian Science Citation Index) is not selective at all. Accepting indexing of journals in the RSCI would actually create a cultural bias: English-language journals need to be included in a selective database, but Russian-language journals only need to be included in the RSCI. The journal under discussion here has no impact whatsoever. Searching Google Scholar (not using the above link containing the dab) under its English title gives a grand total of 3 cites. Searching for its Russian title lists a few hundred articles published in this journal (showing, by the way, that GS indexed journals in Russian), none of which has been cited, not even in Russian journals. In short, we have no sources discussing this journal (and for those claiming there is a cultural bias at work here, I would like to remind everybody here that sources in Russian are perfectly acceptable), we have no inclusion in databases that are even remotely selective, and we have no evidence that this journal has any significant impact. I fail to see how anybody can argue that this journal is notable. --Randykitty (talk) 18:45, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - It meets notability. Karlhard (talk to me) 00:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
- Question Karlhard, not even any of the above editors have dared argue that this meets no less than GNG. Could you perhaps be so kind to explain which sources discussing this journal in-depth comply with GNG? Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)