User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2020/February

Linköping University Electronic Press is no Predatory publishing
Hi Headbomb.

In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrypTool, you deleted the following reference



with the comment "Predatory". But LiP is by no means a predatory publisher.

LiP is the publisher of the university of Linköping. You can find more info: http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/index.en.asp

Their proceedings series are listed at the Norwegian list, level 1. Criteria to publish in the conference proceedings are peer reviewed articles with international program committee. They publish for free. The according proceedings were published as part of the Nordic association of language technology NEALT, and LiU is their formal publisher.

May I ask you to revert the change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CrypTool&type=revision&diff=927848936&oldid=927746561

Best regards, BeEs1 (BeEs1 (talk) 13:07, 3 February 2020 (UTC))
 * done. I didn't mean to delete that one, only the SciencePress journal. My bad. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

what does ce mean?
some of your edits to articles have "ce" as the reason, what does ce mean? --Disoff (talk) 13:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * CE means Copy editing. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Re Nomination of Quadruple and quintuple innovation helix (Q2IH) framework for deletion
Please see my response to you at . --Johncdraper (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:19, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Dear Headbomb, I have run a revision of this page in my sandbox and no predatory journal was detected. Please see my response to you on  and get back to me if this issue is not resolved. Peace, Johncdraper (talk) 09:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for review...
Hello, I have an Italian physicist requesting that his biography be created after having been deleted twice by AfD 10 years ago... I have helped him get started, but would like someone better knowledgeable in the subject to check up as far as accuracy, notability, resources, etc... if you could please see my talk page for our discussion (and links to past AfD's, etc.), and his sandbox for his current draft article... he appears to pass WP:PROF #'s 1 and/or 8 now, but I am just getting back after a 10 year break myself and would like a second opinion... thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:12, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That user was banned and for good reason. He's probably notable though.&#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Thanks! That's why it was made! &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Question about an editing tool
I thought your edit here was well-done, and was intrigued about the tool you seemed to use to assist you with this. I was not able to locate (and consider using) it. Can you share a link with it? Thank you. --- FULBERT (talk) 01:53, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That's the citation expander. See also Wikipedia Signpost/2022-08-01/Tips and tricks. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:07, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for this. I have used Expand Citations via the Tools on the left nav bar, though never am able to see the Citations button anyplace such as you mentioned or the instructions state. Also, when I use the Expand Citations button on the left of an article page, the Edit History lists the bot as the one that changed things as activated by me, which is different than how your editing use of this tool appears. --- FULBERT (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * the stuff you see done by me is through the button. If it doesn't display for you, I would advise asking at WP:VPT since there's people that know about that sort of stuff there. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:13, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thank you; I opened a question about it. FULBERT (talk) 17:41, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Thanks, my pleasure. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:01, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

item note
I appreciate your recent kind input and insights to me. As you requested, I have drafted this as a proposal, with a link to draft in my user space. would you like to comment? I have posted one note at this link. feel free to comment if you wish. I appreciate your input and insights. thanks!!

Link: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Physics

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 11:53, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'm taking you to ANI, this has to stop. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:23, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Be very careful
Hi, just pointing out that you may want to be a little more careful when making observations such as this regarding the behaviour of a trusted and valued administrator. Editors have been permanently site banned for less before, without even the need to do any digging. And I really doubt you would want to give anyone reason to do any digging into you. Just some things to think about. Cheers! Slatneck (talk) 05:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Veiled threats? Well that's just grand. They won't work, BTW. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:57, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

"The journal Nature" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The journal Nature. Since you had some involvement with the The journal Nature redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Doug Mehus T · C  17:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure I never had anything to do with that redirect. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , No, but you edited at Nature (journal) recently, and I thought you may be interested in it as you're often interested in scholarly journals. Doug Mehus T · C  18:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, much appreciated! &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:24, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Nehrim: At Fate's Edge for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nehrim: At Fate's Edge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nehrim: At Fate's Edge until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:29, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Tragedy of the commons
I have no problem at all with the source removal, I just added the doi. I was just wondering if it did matter that the article was also published in IJMBR http://www.ijmbr.info/abstract.php?archiveid=96 as I indicated in a comment, I am not overly familiar with predatory journals. --Ihaveacatonmydesk (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That too has all the appearance of a predatory journal. I don't know if it is or not, but it doesn't look like a reputable venue. The best (although not perfect) resources on the subject is probably https://beallslist.net/. But if you get warned that you're trying to add a predatory sources, well, that's usually a sign that it is. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:30, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ok, thank you --Ihaveacatonmydesk (talk) 00:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposal at the Village Pump to streamline the welcome template
Hi Headbomb! Since you've edited previously at the Wikipedia Help Project discussion page, I'd like to invite you to join the discussion at Village pump (proposals). Sdkb (talk) 04:57, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

FUTON bias
Hi,

So after reading WP:DUE, for the proposed paragraph for FUTON bias to meet the criteria of this would need a reference and proof of significance, inadequate sources include: a web log, a Wikipedia essay or Wikipedia talk page discussion. I am assuming a book, journal article or news article would be okay, right?

Thanks for filling me in. --Lent (talk) 01:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

 * 👍, no worries. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)