Talk:Econ Journal Watch

biased in favor
It seems that this page is a bit biased in favor of EWJ, and could use a rewrite from a more detached perspective. I'm particularly thinking of the idea that EWJ fills an alleged void... 207.245.100.120 21:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Chris

How is this biased. All it provides is facts, EJW is a well respected journal that contains 7 nobel laureates. Fringe sites such as Sourcewatch have glowing wiki articles that could have been written by the creators of Sourcewatch themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabaton10 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have rewritten the article in an neutral way. As for Sourcewatch, seeWP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. If it is biased, re-write it, don't use that as an argument to let this article be promotional, too. --Crusio (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge?
I think this article should be merged into Atlas Network. Any objections? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:43, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The journal meets WP:NJournals, so there is no need for merging for notability reasons. On the other hand, being notable doesn't mean that it has to have an article, so if it would make for a better article, I have no objection too merging. --Randykitty (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)