Talk:The Black Scholar

Issues and comments
Good job @Rootbeerlc with cleaning up the article so far. I couple of glaring issues I still see: Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 19:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The Princeton Review of Academic Journals: this source is a bit misleading. This is a group blog written by Princeton grad students. This isn’t some book or journal published by Princeton and it doesn’t seem lead-worthy.
 * The Black Scholar has featured articles by US… and Historians, economists, social and political scientists…: yeah, we don’t do that promotional stuff here. I’m sure lots of smart people have written for the journal but we’re not going to list out everyone’s profession.
 * Production section: this looks pretty good!
 * Journal’s origin section : Seems fine.
 * Landmark papers and special issues: about half of this section is unsourced
 * Activist involvement: there seems to be just one citation at the top. Is this citation meant to cover everything in that section?
 * Black Scholar Press and Further reading sections: indiscriminate listings


 * Thank you! I will trim the PRinceton Review and Black Scholar has featured articles by...
 * Re Landmark papers and special issues: what would qualify here as a source? Referring to the specific issues and articles (season and year of pub) is provided; do you want volume and issue number as well? I have provided professional-organizational, scholarly and newspaper references that speak to the significance of the majority of the papers and issues listed here--would like more?
 * What makes the Black Scholar PRess indiscriminate? What would be required to make it discriminate?
 * Further reading section: what makes it indiscriminate? Further reading references are all peer reviewed scholarship on the journal, most of which are cited in earlier references. What would be required to make it discriminate? Rootbeerlc (talk) 20:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Re landmark papers: well about half of those paragraphs don’t have sources at all. You would need to include reliable, independent sources that speak of the significance of those papers.
 * Re further reading: How about you just limit it to 3 texts. Choose texts that you haven’t already used as a reference.
 * Re Black Scholar Press: I guess same advice. Limit it to 3 of the most important texts. Though, I will say such a section is not typical in these types of articles. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I see 'landmark' to refer, among other things, to an inaugural, epoch-making event such as publishing the first collection of writings by a professional association (here of Black Anthropologists), or publishing the first international conference of women writers from the Black world, by the first organization dedicated to that community. The journal source verifies that these were inaugural events... Rootbeerlc (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * By “journal source” what specific source are you referring to? Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 22:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * By 'journal source', I am referring to the specific journal issue (date and year), and the editorial front matter of that issue, in which the material was published. I would be able to insert a scan of the table of contents for the issues in question, if that would help-? Rootbeerlc (talk) 00:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * So you’re referring to issues published in the Black Scholar, correct? Unfortunately, you will need to use WP:THIRDPARTY sources. In other words, sources that are not the TBS or people who are associated with the TBS (e.g, founders of the journals). Really, the only time you would be citing TBS directly are for basic pieces of information, like whose the current editor in chief, who publishes the journal, etc. For everything else, you would need independent sources. Otherwise, the material should get cut. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 00:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)