Talk:Superstition in Turkey

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Spring 2017. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Hanyang University/Sociology of Everyday Life (2017) ()" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occult Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Turkey Low‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Review[edit]

You've made a lot of good progress! Things to do:

create a WP:LEAD/introduction section
make sure each paragraph has a reference (or references)
format references to make sure they have title, date, etc.

Good job! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific research publishing[edit]

Some content is being removed because there are claims that [1] is an unreliable source (predatory open access journal). It would be good to provide a proof of that claim - what basis do you have to say it is a predatory OAJ? And even if it is, where is the WP:RS part or a WP:RSN conclusion that states those are not acceptable sources? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Read our article on Scientific Research Publishing. It absolutely is unreliable. A fair proportion of our links to this publisher are added by the article authors themselves, in fact. Guy (Help!) 09:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The company is not particularly reliable, yes, but I still don't see which part of our policies allows us to say it is below the threshold for WP:RS. Yes, RS does caution against predatory OAJ, but it doesn't say they cannot be used. Like all sources, we have to consider this in more detail. If it was medical research, I'd agree that POAJ should be banned on sight. But this is a low key cultural studies topic with little controversy. The article seems ok - hardly good quality, but I don't see any obvious errors there or anything that would mark it as problematic. Being published by POAJ should not disqualify the work. If you want to have this removed, you should show a consensus from WP:RSN that this article is unreliable, or consensus from WP:RS that everything published in POAJ is not acceptable on sight. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:56, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It has no peer-review. It is basically self-publishing. You pay the fee, your paper goes in, regardless of merit. That fails WP:RS. This is not a controversial view (check at WP:RSN if you like). Guy (Help!) 00:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question (btw, two links to copies of the same text :-) ^[1]^[2] is an extremely naive work by a nobody student. It does have the basic facts straight, because the author cites them from reliable sources rather than from her own research. Therefore a proper approach is to pinch the "morsels of wisdom" from this article and trace them to good sources, some of which are cited there (such as "kurşun dökme"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staszek Lem (talk • contribs) 10:09, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

References

^ Güliz Ulu. "Similarity in Superstitions in Anatolian and Chinese Cultures" (PDF). File.scirp.org. Retrieved 2017-06-25.
^ Ulu, Güliz (2016). "Similarity in Superstitions in Anatolian and Chinese Cultures". Advances in Anthropology. 06 (03): 37–44. doi:10.4236/aa.2016.63005.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

Thank you for the constructive suggestion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[auto-1] Güliz Ulu. "Similarity in Superstitions in Anatolian and Chinese Cultures" (PDF). File.scirp.org. Retrieved 2017-06-25.

[:0-2] Ulu, Güliz (2016). "Similarity in Superstitions in Anatolian and Chinese Cultures". Advances in Anthropology. 06 (03): 37–44. doi:10.4236/aa.2016.63005.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

[1]

[2]