Search results
Only searching in pages whose title starts with "Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard" (Search all pages)
The page '"Scientific Reports"' does not exist; did you mean "Scientific Reports"? If not, you can create a draft and submit it for review or request that a redirect be created, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.
- cure" would be a WP:REDFLAG and require even stronger sourcing. The Scientific Reports paper you link is primary research in an iffy journal, so fails WP:MEDRS...250 KB (34,669 words) - 05:41, 14 June 2024
- Vernix Caseosa Delivering Branched Fats and Squalene to the GI Tract". Scientific Reports. 8 (1): 7478. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-25871-1. ISSN 2045-2322. is a...251 KB (32,416 words) - 05:51, 16 May 2022
- worth anything): there will be lots of scientific reports to back it up. I suggest that we use those scientific reports (if any) instead. Huldra (talk) 20:33...161 KB (19,574 words) - 05:42, 3 March 2023
- Organization. The reliability of these sources range from formal scientific reports, which can be the equal of the best reviews published in medical journals...321 KB (47,236 words) - 05:41, 3 March 2023
- low, MDPI journals don't stick out as any worse than say, PeerJ or Scientific Reports. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC) Yes, they probably...205 KB (26,015 words) - 18:59, 14 November 2021
- situation where they published acupuncture pseudoscience[5]), as well as Scientific Reports (recently implicated in a problematic situation where they published...235 KB (31,621 words) - 20:36, 10 February 2023
- fungus have been published in other reputable journals, including scientific reports and others. I think the most likely explanation is that this was a...248 KB (34,959 words) - 07:55, 24 July 2024
- Organization. The reliability of these sources ranges from formal scientific reports, which can be the equal of the best reviews published in medical journals...239 KB (31,852 words) - 15:25, 12 July 2024
- Exchange Quarterly (a well known predatory pay to play journal), 5.11 Scientific Reports (where half the editorial board resigned in disgust at sham peer review)...234 KB (31,001 words) - 06:01, 3 November 2023
- Psychology, Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, Nature Neuroscience, Scientific Reports, Journal of Biological Research-Thessaloniki, Human Genetics, International...250 KB (30,656 words) - 05:51, 16 May 2022
- 08:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Which of the following best describes Scientific Reports? Option 1: Generally reliable Option 2: Additional considerations...232 KB (31,028 words) - 13:20, 26 October 2023
- would say oversimplified). If you prefer a more empirical approach, Scientific Reports is a journal published by Springer (more precisely, Springer Nature...237 KB (32,606 words) - 03:31, 24 December 2023
- Is it permissible to cite scientific reports which written by journalists or science reporters? If they claim that they write what scientists and specialists...251 KB (35,221 words) - 20:01, 18 July 2024
- consensus. (Incidentally, Scientific Reports is another dodgy source). Bon courage (talk) 06:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC) Scientific Reports is a megajournal that...250 KB (31,469 words) - 17:00, 14 February 2024
- sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC) Wouldn't use Scientific Reports for anything much. Bon courage (talk) 05:12, 5 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ATTRIBUTE...248 KB (34,155 words) - 16:51, 20 March 2024
- respectable journals. One could easily make the same critique of Scientific Reports, which is also full of both junk and excellent research, but no one...250 KB (33,773 words) - 04:17, 28 March 2023