Talk:Papers from the Institute of Archaeology

AfD discussion
Surprised Articles for deletion/Papers from the Institute of Archaeology was closed based on one vote...I was mid-reply when it closed; waited overnight after trying (and failing) to research index-ranking criteria. My take, while now irrelevant unless someone contests the decision:


 * Weak keep. I disagree notability. Not sure what's meant by "local publication", or what it why that would be grounds for article deletion. It's publicly available worldwide on the internet, and 2 of 9 papers in the latest volume are from international contributors, if those are relevant to the issue of localness. The lack of in-depth coverage specifically about the journal would be required for general notability (WP:GNG) but not for a journal (WP:NJOURNAL). PIA's articles are cited in more than 30 books (search for "Papers from the Institute of Archaeology" on books.google.com, and in dozens of articles from other international journals. WP:NJOURNAL lists among its criteria “the journal is frequently cited by other reliable sources”, and I guess it boils down to how you interpret "frequently".


 * Randykitty, how did/would you evaluate the selectivity of the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)? While time-consuming, I could envision comparisons between indices and index-independent journal rankings within a field (e.g. independently calculated rankings of economics journals), but even then the results are skewed by people gaming their profession's/institution's "importance" formulas by targeting journals based on which indices they use. (And of course gaming any independent journal-ranking system, by quoting/citing friends etc.) Like South African authors overwhelmingly value publishing in IBSS and SSCI journals because those are what their Dept of Education uses, so journals added to those indices will soon appear to be more "selectively chosen" regardless of the criteria an index uses, simply because of IBSS & Thomas' established market dominance.


 * ––Agyle (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)