Talk:Applied Physics (journal)

Untitled
Dear Administrator. Please, consider to update your bot, it should not attack links to scienticic journals.

Many articles have clickable references. Such a reference look nice, if they cite the existing article about the Journal. Wiki should have links to all such per-reviewed scientific journals; perhapos, even proceedengs. The publications in such journals are very important source of information for Wiki.

If a user looks for a specific journal, we should not foce him to use other databases, where on the request "Journal of Physics B" the user is offered something like

Discount rate for any Journal of Physics B you like, and much more! (commertial link)

Choose your Journal of Physics B, new or used; discount prides! (commertical link)

Sell your Journal of Physics B, best management! (commercial link)

Sincerely, dima 03:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Two things I would like to point out:
 * 1) I am not a bot, but a simple human bing who regularly edits the English wikipedia.
 * 2) Marking pages for speedy deletion is not an "attack" but a regular and necessary part of the sites maintenance, to keep the caliber of articles in wikipedia high.
 * 3) I just finished explaining website notability to another user. This article has the following characteristics:
 * Does not assert or show reasonable evidence of notability
 * Has very little content, may also qualify for speedy deletion criterion A1 {see here for description}

AS such, this article, as I see it, has little to no purpose. As of the writing of this comment, there are 1,653,609 articles in Wikipedia. If every website and magazine were given an article, this number would skyrocket, and the overall quality of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia would plummet. Wikipedia is trying to be an encyclopedia of all things noteworthy, not a catalog of all things. This article seems more like a catalog entry than an encyclopedia article. If you can expand it to the point of notability than be my guest, elsewise this article should be deleted. Wikipedia is not a search engine. This info (and more, could be found in Google, without clicking any of the links. (By the way, please don't take any offense at what I say, I am simply speaking the way I enterpret wikipedia's policy and guidelines.--Vox Rationis 04:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

dealing with this

 * I have dealt with the issue by rewriting & strengthening the article (& combining A & B). The author is perfectly correct that scientific journal articles should never be deleted, and there are a number of editors who will support this view very strongly--and so far, very successfully. But this requires the articles to be of a uniformly consistent standard in the first place to avoid attracting attention from those who do not understand. I've made a temporary fix, and I or others will upgrade further. I have explained in detail on your talk page.DGG 05:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)