Misplaced Pages

User talk:Abductive

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EVula (talk | contribs) at 05:04, 11 June 2009 (moved User talk:Joey the Mango to User talk:Abductive: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Joey the Mango" to "Abductive"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:04, 11 June 2009 by EVula (talk | contribs) (moved User talk:Joey the Mango to User talk:Abductive: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Joey the Mango" to "Abductive")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Abductive, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

University of Salford Students' Union

Hi there. I've removed the notability box and would ask that if you are concerned about notability, another AfD would be more appropriate. Thanks. TorstenGuise (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Alternate account

So, who's alternate account are you? No new account jumps right in and creates an AFD. It would be best you just say it, instead of not responding, or blanking this message, as I will file an SPI if you don't, and they will find out who you are.— Dædαlus 04:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

  • I'm not really an alternate account, I forced myself to take a break from editing, and scrambled my password (that was a while back). Since then I've created other accounts, and either quit editing for a while and then scrambled or forgot my password. Mostly recently I created an account, but forgot to link it to an email, so when stupid IE lost my browser history I was SOL. This has happened a couple of times, actually. I'm not sure you'll learn much from whatever an SPI is, since I haven't sockpuppeted. You might have more luck looking for similar editing patterns, but in the end, all you will see is a pretty much what I do now, with a series of accounts. Joey the Mango (talk) 04:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for jumping the gun, SPI is withdrawn, btw.— Dædαlus 04:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay... Joey the Mango (talk) 04:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Tagging for speedy deletion

Hi Joey the Mango. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted to inform you that I declined to delete South Edmonton Business Association, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion under criterion A7 because of the following concern: Please remember that any indication for importance or significance (like reliable sources mentioning the subject) are enough to fail A7 deletion. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather tag such pages for proposed deletion or start an appropriate deletion discussion. Regards SoWhy 09:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Template sandbox

Sorry, it looked like you were vandalising a template, my apoligies, Spitfire 17:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of South Edmonton Business Association

An article that you have been involved in editing, South Edmonton Business Association, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/South Edmonton Business Association. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Dawn Bard (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

faculty

Yes, lots of non-notable professors try to get an article here, and it's good to remove them. But as a rough guide, associate professors with 2 books by major university presses normally turn out to be notable when checked further, on the basis of their citations to their work, which shows the influence in a subject required by WP:PROF. I used my own judgment based on having seen numerous of these get kept or deleted at afd, and I removed the prods from a few where I think the work might be sufficient. I suspect others may remove a few more of the tags. If you want to take to AfD, do, but I would suggest going slowly to see what happens. Personally, I have my doubts that anyone could really screen properly at the rate you seem to be going. I unfortunately don't have time to investigate and fix them all to keep up with you, as it is considerably harder than to do a GS search and nominate. I can't even besure I am deprodding al lof the appropriate ones. On what basis are you identifying these people--just curious, not necessarily a criticism, except insofar that doing a large number of deletion nomination and essentially nothing else always raises some questions. DGG (talk) 00:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

  • That's what Prods are for... I did a Web of Knowledge h-index check. Joey the Mango (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry, that wasn't what I meant to ask--how did you come to pick these out of the thousands of academic bios to check in the first place? Since you have found some fairly long-standing problematic articles, I wonder if three is some way of screening that the rest of us have been missing. Could you share your methods with us? DGG (talk) 03:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
      • I Google advanced search "is an assistant professor" or "currently an assistant professor" (and the same with associate) with "-award" "-chair" "-poet". (At first I confined the results to the last year, catching newer articles.) Then I did a Google Scholar search on their name, and if it had a lot of citations I stop. If they had few I did a WoK search, sorted by times cited for a crude h-index. Joey the Mango (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Good work, we need to get rid of prof-cruft. If I believed in barnstar silliness I would give you one. You might consider saving something to your user page so it won't be a red link and create suspicion. Drawn Some (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I've already pissed off several regulars, and I've already forgotten the password to this account, so I'll disappear soon enough. Joey the Mango (talk) 18:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Otay. Drawn Some (talk) 18:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
WoK is useless for the humanities. So utterly worthless that some of my colleagues think they never should have done it if they were not going to do it right and include published books as sources--unfortunately this was too big a job for anyone but google, & they are still incomplete for lack of publisher cooperation. Please read the article on h-index to see why it alone is not an adequate discriminatory tool in humanities. The minimum things you should do additionally is check for libraries holding the published works in worldCat, check for book reviews in Google News archive as well as by looking at the list of results from google scholar to see which might be book reviews, and using Scopus for Europeans in the social sciences or applied sciences since it supplements WoK there. The other factor you are not adequately taking into account is the nature of the University. There is a considerable difference between a professorship at, say, my two alumni maters, Berkeley and Brooklyn College, though Brooklyn, when I went there at least, was an excellent undergraduate school.
I do not want to discourage you from doing this, but I want you to do it better. There are indeed quite a number of academic bios put in by university pPR offices and the like that we do need to get rid of.
To get some idea of why we have the practices we do, you might want to read the past discussions of WT:PROF, and perhaps some of those on my talk page archive for academics, .
as for prods, any article I think would benefit from wide exposure I shall deprod in this or any other area. This will certainly include Associate professors at research universities.
do not worry about pissing me off--you have not managed that yet. The only thing that has come near, is doing more than 2 or 3 a day, because there's a serious unsymmetry --it is much harder to defend an article than attack it. DGG (talk) 22:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I know that people will deprod, and as long as it isn't wholesale I don't mind. I went for the low-hanging fruit, and it is already becoming harder to find articles to prod. I also read the articles, and although I am less impressed with prestigious schools than some, I do take into account what the article says the person is working on. Additionally, I look at the history, and if the article has a lot of editors, I research much more thoroughly than if the article was written by the prof. Joey the Mango (talk) 23:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, your plan to go first for the low-hanging fruit is excellent. Assistant profs may easier to deal with than associate profs as the latter may be more likely to be on their way to notability and give rise to interminable AfD debates as we have seen recently. Almost all the entries that come to the academic/educators deletion discussion page are about people who have achieved something worthwhile in their lives even if they have not yet obtained Wiki notability. There are many areas of WP in which the fruit are hanging even lower, for example, but not limited to, WP:fancruft area Fantasy fiction that are absolutely useless IMHO, and where the technical issues are less complex. This is an area that badly needs attention. Best wishes for your editing. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:33, 7 June 2009 (UTC).
but you'll find me there also defending keeps and merges; this is a comprehensive encyclopedia, and covers all fields of human endeavor, including some, like sitcoms, that I;d rather not know about personally, and some others who very existence I deplore. Fortunately, for academics, there are more consistent criteria than most other subjects--it is one of the few professions outside athletics to have a formal hierarchy.
Well, I'll hit random article for a while and see what is out there... Joey the Mango (talk) 04:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

An article you proposed for deletion is now at AFD

Hi there - just wanted to give you a heads up about Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/William Brandon Snyder - you proposed it for deletion a couple of days ago, but the PROD was declined. Cheers, Dawn Bard (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Check this out

Hey Joey the Mango, you seem to be quite informed with the AfD's, therefore I was wondering if you could take a look at this article: David Morales (musician), which seems me as a self-promotional one with a lot of unsourced POV's. The "External links" mostly contain "My Space" and fansite stuff. If you consider that this person does not meet the "notability" criteria of Misplaced Pages, please do me the honors of nominating it for deletion, because I'm good at messing up these things. Take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Unless he didn't win a Grammy, his article suffers from a tone problem, but cannot be deleted. Did he get a Grammy? Joey the Mango (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I may be wrong, but I couldn't find anything about the Grammy. I just happened to stumble into his article because someone added him to the "List of Puerto Ricans" without a verifiable reliable source to proof his notability as is now required and I removed his name. However, I became curious and read the article, which I imagine was either written by him or a fan with a lack of citations. What I found in a Google search was mostly unreliable sources. I wonder. Anyway, I want to thank you for checking it out. Tony the Marine (talk) 06:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Enectali Figueroa deleted

Hello Hey Joey the Mango, Enectali Figueroa was deleted, but I want you to know that on my part there are no hard feelings. You and I are two good Wikipedians not like others who would make a big deal out of the results of an AfD. Besides, who knows may be in the future Enectali Figueroa might accumulate enough notability to have his article re-created, right? Tony the Marine (talk) 14:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)