User talk:CAAD23

February 2023
Hello, I'm MrOllie. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. MrOllie (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Many colleagues and myself review articles from JMP/SCIRP of high quality and both readers as well as reiewers are satistfied with the quality of the articles. Things have changes since then, but you appear to rely on just one critic which no more actual.
 * If you wish we can discuss the issue in details per zoom and hear if your arguments are really verifiable... CAAD23 (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * See WP:V, WP:NOR. You cannot substitute your own judgment for that of the cited sources. You definitely cannot edit war on that basis over the objections of other Wikipedia editors. Communications are generally kept on Wikipedia here. - MrOllie (talk) 13:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * SCIRP is pretty unambiguously a predatory publisher, all of their journals are rated zero (i.e. predatory) on the Norwegian Scientific Index, and Cabells Predatory Reports (The premier cataloguer of predatory journals in the post Beall-era) has openly describes them as such quite recently. I'd avoid wasting your time reviewing for them in the future. Hemiauchenia (talk) 14:07, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It would help a lot if you could mention the references that you rely on so confidently.. Looking forward... CAAD23 (talk) 14:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * They're clearly mentioned in the article text, but for convenience  Hemiauchenia (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)