I added SCImago sector-specific top-20 rankings from 2009 to 2019, and User:Randykitty removed it because he/she feels this is (crap) unencyclopedic, not encyclopedic, content. We briefly talked on his/her talk page User talk:Randykitty. It went on editing war...and he/sh requested creating this Talk page and topic... Here it is now, so what's next?
All pages on sport championships (see List of English football champions), politics polling (see Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election), and academic rankings (Academic Ranking of World Universities) include such types of content. User:Randykitty argues that WP:Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. But this sounds double standard to me, still.
With regard to Academic rankings, there is a heavy emphasis on University rankings on Wiki and in the world general. But Academia is not only about Universities but also research institutions. SCImago's ranking sounds (to me) the most reliable academic ranking accounting for all types of academic structures, not only universities. I support extending this page by adding tables collating Top-20 rankings by sector and year, which can not be easily found elsewhere. Top 20 is somewhat arbitrary, but it expands on what was already on this page when I started editing it. I support re-adding these summary tables. Jybernard (talk) 09:25, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- First of all it should perhaps be shown that somebody is actually paying any attention to these rankings. The article uses exclusively references from SCImago themselves. It is therefore unclear that this actually meets our inclusion criteria. If notability cannot be established, I'll propose this for deletion (or possibly merge this with the slightly better known SCImago Journal Rank in an article on SCImago). --Randykitty (talk) 10:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)