Talk:Jahrbuch für Forschungen zur Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung

Untitled
I created the article because as a labour historian I know this journal as a relevant source in the field, - but to convince the rest of you I put together some sources for this:

According to the Notability Guideline for academic journals this journal is relevant, because it fulfills the criteria Nr 1. "The journal is considered by reliable sources to be influential in its subject area. The subject area is German labor history - a very specialized area, which means that classical citation indexes such as thompson etc do not apply - as it is said in the guidelines: "For journals in humanities, the existing citation indices and GoogleScholar often provide inadequate and incomplete information". This is true especially for non-english journals.

But several other sources indicate that the journal is frequently used for discussions on German labour history:


 * The Journal is listed as relevant and reputable source in the German AHF Bibliography-database, a scholarly database on history journals : AHF


 * many German resarch institutions and universities have subscriptions, according to "Zeitschriftendatenbank"


 * International institutions around the world (Sweden, Finland, Israel, Vienna, USA) also have subscriptions, according to [http://kvk.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/hylib-bin/kvk/nph-kvk2.cgi?maske=kvk-last&lang=de&title=KIT-Bibliothek%3A+Karlsruher+Virtueller+Katalog+KVK+%3A+Ergebnisanzeige&head=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fkvk%2Fkvk%2Fkvk-kit-head-de-2010-11-08.html&header=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fkvk%2Fkvk%2Fkvk-kit-header-de-showEmbeddedFullTitle.html&spacer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fkvk%2Fkvk%2Fkvk-kit-spacer-de-2010-11-08.html&footer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fkvk%2Fkvk%2Fkvk-kit-footer-de-2010-11-08.html&css=none&input-charset=utf-8&ALL=Jahrbuch+f%C3%BCr+Forschungen+zur+Geschichte+der+Arbeiterbewegung&target=_blank&Timeout=120&TI=&PY=&AU=&SB=&CI=&SS=&ST=&PU=&VERBUENDE=&kataloge=SWB&kataloge=BVB&kataloge=NRW&kataloge=HEBIS&kataloge=HEBIS_RETRO&kataloge=KOBV_SOLR&kataloge=GBV&kataloge=DDB&kataloge=STABI_BERLIN&kataloge=TIB&kataloge=OEVK_GBV&kataloge=VD16&kataloge=VD17&kataloge=ZDB&OESTERREICH=&kataloge=BIBOPAC&kataloge=LBOE&kataloge=OENB&SCHWEIZ=&kataloge=SWISSBIB&kataloge=HELVETICAT&kataloge=BASEL&kataloge=ZUERICH&kataloge=ETH&kataloge=VKCH_RERO&kataloge=NLAU&kataloge=DAENEMARK_REX&kataloge=EROMM&kataloge=UBHS&kataloge=FINNLAND_VERBUND&kataloge=BNF_PARIS&kataloge=ABES&kataloge=COPAC&kataloge=BL&kataloge=VERBUND_ISRAEL&kataloge=EDIT16&kataloge=ITALIEN_VERBUND&kataloge=ITALIEN_SERIALS&kataloge=CISTI&kataloge=NLCA&kataloge=LUXEMBURG&kataloge=NB_NIEDERLANDE&kataloge=VERBUND_NORWEGEN&kataloge=NB_POLEN&kataloge=PORTUGAL&kataloge=STAATSBIB_RUSSLAND&kataloge=VERBUND_SCHWEDEN&kataloge=BNE&kataloge=REBIUN&kataloge=NB_TSCHECHIEN&kataloge=NB_UNGARN&kataloge=LOC_DIREKT&kataloge=WORLDCAT Karlsruher Katalog].

There are also other indications for the notability of the journal:

-It is used as a reputable source for several dozen articles in both the German and the English wikipedia - see the German List of articles and the English one. It would be a contradiction if wikipedia on the one hand uses a journal as source but on the other hand would declare it irrelevant and delete an article that gives more information about it.

-The German wikipedia recognized it as relevant without further discussion.

-There was a section in the article about promintent historians such as Marcel van der Linden and others using the journal as a forum, giving some names and a reference from the table of contents of the journal. It was deleted, which makes sense, but when talking about the notability it is relevant if a journal is used for publication by well-known international scholars or not.

I think, all that said, it is ok to delete the notability-warning.

Bart makes art (talk) 09:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)