Talk:Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics

Deprodding
I plan to deprod this article as the journal appears to indexed in SCOPUS, which according the WP:NJournals suggests that the journal is notable. The journal has a SCOPUS Sourcerecord id of 5700165211 in the latest list of SCOPUS journals at Scopus - SciVerse title list (xls file) --Mark viking (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking that. I have the old version of Office and cannot open the title list (too large to be converted...) --Randykitty (talk) 11:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It is a big file. I was able to open it with Gnumeric. --Mark viking (talk) 16:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * 2004-2006 was covered in the ADSABS database. Not really sure why coverage stopped. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Mark and Headbomb, how come you two read the Scopus reference differently? If it is not in Scopus, then what is the evidence for notability, if any? --Randykitty (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Headbomb added that the journal was indexed in the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS) from 2004-2006. As far as I know ADS and Scopus are independent entities, so there is no conflict here. But perhaps I misunderstood your question. --Mark viking (talk) 17:15, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it's indeed a bit confusing. I was referring to the fact that he removed the mention of the Scopus listing that you added and said in his edit summary that the reference didn't support the listing. --Randykitty (talk) 17:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it's not in Scopus. I'm saying the webpage that was given as a reference did not support the claim. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've now installed Gnumeric (thanks for the tip, Mark!) If I understand correctly, Headbomb's only problem was the sourcing. I'll re-add Scopus with (hopefully) a more appropriate reference. --Randykitty (talk) 08:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It's somewhat of a shame we can't find better sources, the peer-review quality in this journal seems very uneven... I haven't looked much, but no one seems to have noticed this. I don't know how widespread this is, but that Sorli guy... well let's just say he uses viXra . Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 11:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't disagree, this really is borderline. But listing in Scopus meets WP:NJournals, although I have to say that I find Scopus becoming less and less selective, including quite a lot of shady, questionable journals (the current journal being one of them). --Randykitty (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202041814/http://cdn.elsevier.com:80/assets/excel_doc/0003/148548/title_list.xlsx to http://cdn.elsevier.com/assets/excel_doc/0003/148548/title_list.xlsx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)