Talk:Significance (magazine)

ASA
From the ASA web page Significance: "Beginning with the September 2010 issue, the ASA and Royal Statistical Society (RSS) will collaborate on the publication of Significance, the magazine RSS established in 2004. This partnership is the realization of a dream held by both societies for an international outreach publication that will enhance both organizations and the statistics profession." Run54 (talk) 15:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Yes the partnership saw the first joint-issue with September 2010 issue and a new website. The magazine now has two editorial boards, one American-led and the other UK-led and they meet regularly to discuss strategy, ideas for articles, author-sourcing etc. The magazine goes out to all members of both Societies but the aim is to get it beyond the subscriber list. (braxxa 16:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdelhk (talk • contribs)


 * Still the article says nothing about the joint publication by the two societies. It says that it is a journal of RSS (only). Would someone like to revise the first paragraph to make it reflect the current status? (That is the point ...) Run54 (talk) 23:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me, I'm not getting your point - the magazine is 'published' by Wiley's but the content and editing of the magazine is done jointly by both the ASA and the RSS - that's why I stated the text that says 'the ASA and Royal Statistical Society (RSS) will collaborate on the publication of Significance' - it carries both logos for each society and has two editorial boards etc etc. In that same sentence from the link above it only says 'the magazine RSS established in 2004' not that it is a Journal of the RSS. [User:Abdelhk|Abdelhk]] (Abdelhk) 14:55, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, what the article says is this - "Significance, established in 2004, is a magazine published quarterly by the Royal Statistical Society ..." so what you wrote above is relevant only to your own comments on the discussion page. The point is that the article (not the discussion page) needs a clarification. The journal is jointly published by the two societies through Wiley. Both societies share in the cost of publication as well as the editorial function. Run54 (talk) 23:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

COI ?
It seems that Abdelhk may be closely connected to the RSS (as in employed by). This need not be, and doesn't appear to be, a problem here, as the article is OK. But I think that formallly we need a brief statement on this talk page stating this (or contradicting it), purely as a piece of information for other editors. I certainly don't think the article is overstating the merits of the journal/magazine. On a different topic, it would be good if editors could make use of the edit-descriptor line, rather than leaving it blank. Melcombe (talk) 12:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)