User talk:A. Pronobis

Orphaned non-free image File:Paladyn Cover 2010.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Paladyn Cover 2010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics


The article Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * New journal, has not published a single issue yet, so impossible to be notable. Article creation highly premature. Does not meet WP:Notability (academic journals).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crusio (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Crusio (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics
I have nominated Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Crusio (talk) 08:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics
A tag has been placed on Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  DGG ( talk ) 05:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

advice
This is in response to your posting on the talk page of Jclemens:


 * As you know, it was deleted because it was a copy of the journal's home page. Even if it were rewritten, though, I don;t see how it could possibly  be considered notable: for one thing, the journal; has not yet been published. I suppose it is conceivable that a journal from a famous publisher might generate so much pre-publication comment that it might be notable, but this is going to be exceedingly rare--I don;t think we have 'ever accepted a journal's article here on that basis--but see below for what would be needed to be an exception.  possible exceptions.. . A journal like this from an essentially unknown publisher, even if associated with Springer. is not even remotely likely to be--it is still at the stage of trying to get its first articles. But even when it publishes them, they cannot possibly be notable until some other people have at least cited them. How much they need to be cited is not an absolute figure, but it would normally take several years; I know publishers normally figure that the first 3 years of a journal, it hasn't a chance of breaking even and will have to be subsidized, and that's a good working rule. what you say above underscores this: you are hoping that some indexes will include you. But they haven't. for a journal in the sciences, we normally expect that it be included in the major indexing service in the field at the very least, and in your case the only ones above that would come in that category are Inspec and just possibly Information Science & Technology Abstracts.
 * As for your comparison. Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research has published two complete vols (9 issues) and is in the middle of a third. It is indexed in both Scopus and one of the major indexes in its subject field, Embase. Even so, I think notability is very borderline. It has not yet been tested by a discussion here. Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters is one of the exceptional sort of journals which will be immediately important. why? because it is published by the ACS, by far the most important and prestigious publisher in the subject, and it is published as a complement of one of its most successful journals, Journal of Physical Chemistry, one of the top 10 chemistry journals worldwide. . I'd be prepared to say that any new journal from such a society is likely to be notable immediately, or perhaps even in advance of publication, just as would be the next book of an extremely famous author. I chose the words deliberately, "extremely famous".   . Frankly, when I see a new entry in a field compare its embryonic publication product with one from the most notable producer there is and claim equal status, I take it as a negative sign that they are resorting to one of the most unlikely of all possible PR tactics.
 * "":Please don;t take this as a hostile comment--I am only saying you first have to succeed, and then you will get an article. When the time comes, someone unconnected with the journal should be the one to write it. When you do, perhaps I'll write it myself.  DGG ( talk ) 05:06, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Paladyn Cover 2010.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Paladyn Cover 2010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:23, 14 March 2010 (UTC)