Randykitty
 | Because of personal circumstances, I will be much less online than usual. If you need an admin, please go to WP:AN. If you came here because I speedily deleted an article, please see WP:REFUND first. Thanks. |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
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).
Note on Talk page discussion, new information
editHi Randykitty and Drmies:
I'd like to call your attention to these two (1 and 2) new revelations on the Talk page of Rootbeerlc. I find it extremely difficult to believe someone purporting to be a full professor at a public Ivy has such a perilous understanding of plagiarism that they believe attribution of large volumes of copy/paste is unnecessary if one is copying from friends and relatives. (I mean, I guess, maybe if they were a CS professor ... j/k.)
That rather shocking statement, in concert with the revelation that the article Byron Randall was created to help boost the value of an art collection the editor owns and is actively in the process of selling, causes me to rekindle my concern that this account may be impersonating the aforementioned professor and it's not impossible it might be controlled by another party (i.e. a gallery) with a pecuniary interest in retailing the art the Randall article was created to promote. Chetsford (talk) 03:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Edits restored to Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
editRandykitty, note that after reviewing other academic journal pages on Wikipedia (G2B, for example), I've restored the longer list of abstracting/indexing entries and the section on most-cited articles to this Frontiers article.
Regarding abstracting/indexing: I take your point that, for example, Ulrich's is a borderline inclusion for the indexing list. So too is "ProQuest databases" on the G2B page. Both are accurate and cause no harm to readers by their inclusion.
Regarding a "most cited" articles section (as on G2B) vs a media coverage section for the Frontiers journal: Both sections can rightly be seen as informational and wrongly as promotional. But as above, both inclusions are accurate representations of the reach of the journal's scholarly content and do no harm to readers.
Happy to chat directly via tom.ciavarella [at] frontiersin [dot] org as needed. Tomciav (talk) 23:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Please see WP:COI and WP:UPE and make the appropriate disclosures. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)