Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Academic Journals Resource | Learn About, Share and Discuss Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Academic Journals At Popflock.com

WikiProject Academic Journals (talk)
Resources (talk)	Writing guide (talk)	Assessment (talk)	Notability guidelines (talk)	Journals cited by Wikipedia (talk)

Shortcuts

This page is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

WikiProject Academic Journals

(Rated Project-class)

	v t e This page is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.
Project	This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

WikiProject Academic Journals was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 21 November 2011. If you wish to get involved with the Signpost, please visit the Newsroom.

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Any threads with no replies in 120 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Requesting Citation or Further Discussion To this Speculation

Hi there, I enjoy this project while I was reading about it and I found this passage where to me should be cited at least or I will open the debate around the actual value of the scientific book as follow: (If scientific impact is considered related to the number of endorsements, in the form of citations, a journal receives, then prestige can be understood as a combination of the number of endorsements and the prestige or importance of the journals issuing them.) As the Science is in constant evolution and just to mention this point, endorsements and citation, can be manipulated or modified and the related number attach to it would end up irrecevable or compromised. Based on a journal, unless there is a proof of concept and some applicative solutions, it would be improper to use this argumentation and honorable mention from this book. Best Regards SirlupinwatsonIII (talk) 01:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@SirlupinwatsonIII: what article are you referring to? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

No, citation counts are never a measure of significance or reliability. See also https://sfdora.org/ . Nemo 06:52, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

New pages patrol

Please weigh in: Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers#Journal_articles. Thanks. fgnievinski (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Technology, Education, Management, Informatics

Is this a predatory journal? (ISSN 2217-8309; ISSN 2217-8333) It looks a little fishy, but is indexed at least in a few places. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 23:10, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Any particular reasons why it would be? Looks like any other random European journals from a minor publisher. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Headbomb, Mostly just the look and feel, and the fact that it was open access. Nothing else, really. Thanks for weighing in. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 04:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles to expand and clean up

Journal of Political Economy

and

New Political Economy (journal)

I've added templates wrt expanding for more references. Anyone with a political economy background can help expand and improve these articles? Thanks!

BlueD954 (talk) 07:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Journal of Healthcare Management up for deletion

This could use more eyes from the project. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Widener Law Review

I thought all law reviews were notable. This has been tagged. Notable or not? Ping me, please. Bearian (talk) 01:50, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

popflock.com Resource: Articles for deletion/Shii Studies Review

This could use more eyes. Please comment. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Ping. This has been relisted for 2nd or 3rd time. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:46, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

List of academic preprint servers

Members of this project may be interested in the new article List of academic preprint servers. The main things that caught my eye were a lot of redlinks not accompanied by citations, and the inclusion of viXra. The editor who created it has also been making a lot of changes at List of academic databases and search engines about which I have no strong feelings (although the removal of arXiv strikes me as a bit odd). --JBL (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation hatnote for articles having an eponymous journal

Hi. WP:SIMILAR says that "When two articles share the same title, except that one is disambiguated and the other not, the undisambiguated article should include a hatnote with a link to the other article." This is done most of times, as in Sustainability or Genomics. Yet I'm finding many such hatnotes almost a type of spam, specially for single-word journal titles. This issue is nicely avoided when the main concept already has a separate disambiguation page, as in Toxin. WP:ONEOTHER does allow a DAB page for one topic other than the primary one, but only temporarily. Does this bother anyone else? For many other instances, see Google Search. fgnievinski (talk) 01:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Astrophysics Data System for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

APC vs author pays

There's a discussion at Talk:MDPI#"Author-pays" of about whether article processing charge (used at the PLOS One article, among many others) should be used consistently or 'author-pays' is reasonable language. — Charles Stewart (talk) 06:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Good its finally discussed. Great to have them standardized. I think golden OA will suffice. Most of the time authors don't pay but their funding institutions. Kenji1987 (talk) 09:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

"Gold open access" is ridiculous jargon that should not be used in the lead of any article on any journal or publisher, ever. --JBL (talk) 14:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Plus "Gold open access does not intrinsically mean, however, that the author pays and, indeed, this was not integral to the term as it was coined by Stevan Harnad."^[1]fgnievinski (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

(May I suggest centralizing this discussion at Talk:MDPI#"Author-pays"?) fgnievinski (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Louis Riel#How should Journal of Canadian Studies be cited?

This is something members of this project may have an opinion about, so please comment. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

^ Eve, Martin Paul. "Introduction, or why open access? (Chapter 1) - Open Access and the Humanities". Cambridge Core. pp. 1-42. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316161012.003. Retrieved .

[Eve_pp._1-42-1] Eve, Martin Paul. "Introduction, or why open access? (Chapter 1) - Open Access and the Humanities". Cambridge Core. pp. 1-42. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316161012.003. Retrieved .

[1]