Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals

Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_5
If people could comment on this, that would be great. It's an obvious case IMO but people are bringing weird arguments into it. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases
I started an article on the journal Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, based on a translation from the German Wikipedia. I have a question about the ISO 4 abbreviation. Should the B of borne in the abbreviation be a cap, as it is in the German Wikipedia? Also, the impact factor from 2014 is out of date, but I don't know where to find a more current value. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * For the infobox caps, yes, we capitalize systematically. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Society for Occupational Health Psychology
There is a content disagreement on this article's talk page concerning the section on its academic journal Occupational Health Science. The issue is discussed in this section of the article's talk page. The participation of knowledgeable editors would be welcome. --Randykitty (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Bot_requests
Some of you may have some thoughts on the proposed bot task. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Black Scholar
The journal,The Black Scholar, has been COI-ridden for many, many years. When asked, the editor admitted to their COI and seems receptive to feedback on the article talk page. More eyes on this would be helpful for cleanup/NPOV purposes. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello @Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d, hope you are doing well!
 * I reviewed partially paragraph or section 1 and made minor edit, citations are needed and typographical error correction should be made. I will review the integrety of the document if possible during the wee-end and update as needed here.
 * Have a great afternoon! SirlupinwatsonIII (talk) 19:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, @SirlupinwatsonIII! Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 19:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Feddes Repertorium - Journal of Botanical Taxonomy and Geobotany
The journal Feddes Repertorium does not have an article in the English Wikipedia, but does in a few other languages. It is indexed in Scopus and has a page on Wikidata at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5643138  The title and subtitle have changed over the years. Would it make sense to start by translating the corresponding article from (say) the Portuguese Wikipedia at pt:Feddes Repertorium, or do you see any reason why there should not be an English article about the journal? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:JCO Global Oncology
Could someone please take a look at Draft:JCO Global Oncology? 08:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC) LeapTorchGear (talk) 08:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi there! Should you not add each section as a numbered list instead of listing each index and anoting them with (*) a source. You should insert a link for each index using a simple table list with each their own linkAbstracting and indexing
 * Abstracting and indexing
 * The journal is abstracted and indexed in:
 * Embase
 * Scopus
 * I think you could leave it as is, but annotation mark [*] usually are for source references at the botom of the page, as these sources are the project itself as a reference. A source should not rely on itself? SirlupinwatsonIII (talk) 07:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, I took some time to review the many pages that is used as reference for this article, mainly from their own website used as a platform for publication. There are a couple issue:
 * JCO Global Oncology is a collection of various issues, containing publications, but I can't confirm each divided section, as there is no mention of those nor I could not make any association or I had reasonable doubt that this was not appropriate for further or continuous reading.
 * 1- Peer-reviewed: I could not find any mention for peer-reviewed specifically from the page JCO Global Oncology, as most publication contains each their own section for author details and or affiliation for example, they don't explicitly mention this is a peer-reviewed or it is not at least "visually" accessible.
 * 2- My intuition is that many said article publicly available on the JCO Global Ontology website page, are rapidly made, with few details, and also results in a sort of multi-association from the same author(s) or affiliation(s) to multiply cited articles and generate credit, or the use of various publication with low proportion of correlation... As I would need much more time to further investigate, this is simply an opinion resulting from my actual research.
 * Otherwise I think this is a great article that could be optimized and kept if reorganized and maintained. SirlupinwatsonIII (talk) 00:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

2023 IFs
The 2023 IFs have been put online today. The yearly update challenge begins... --Randykitty (talk) 16:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Commentationes Societatis Physico-Medicae apud Universitatem Litteratum Caesaream Mosquensem Institutae Commentat. Soc. Phys.-Med. Univ. Litt. Caes. Mosq.
Commentat. Soc. Phys.-Med. Univ. Litt. Caes. Mosq. is an early-19th-century Russian journal in which Georg Franz Hoffmann published nine descriptions of new species. See https://www.ipni.org/p/20068-2 Some partial volumes are available through Google Books. https://books.google.com/books?id=_9hYAAAAcAAJ and https://books.google.com/books?id=CNlYAAAAcAAJ I know it's an important journal, but I don't know how to prove it's notable by Wikipedia standards. Its ISSN is 2221-3686, assigned by the Russian ISSN Centre in 2015. I started a Wikidata page: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q126807606 Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Retraction Watch's mass resignations list as a source of articles about journals
Retraction Watch has a list of mass resignations by journal editorial boards at https://retractionwatch.com/the-retraction-watch-mass-resignations-list/ Sometimes a mass resignation is associated with the creation of a new journal. For example, the editors who left Critical Public Health started a new journal, the Journal of Critical Public Health https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q127328389 | https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/jcph/ Not all the new journals will last, and not all of them will be notable, but the resignations may be worth mentioning in the articles on individual journals. As well, the articles on the existing journals will need to be updated to reflect the name of the journal's new editors and whether the journal has switched to open access (which seems to be an issue in many of the resignations). Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Option 1- We could include a "merge" voting application, where similar journal publication that contain exact sources, citation, content, could be merged in one and only article. As this might, in the long-term, become an issue for wikipedia database if we have to many articles that are "double spended".
 * Option 2- We create a version proof dependencies where you can, prior to publication, we should have a measure for observation and receive "hints" to suggest whether or not, a similar article is already made. SirlupinwatsonIII (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

RetractionBot
I posted this story from the Signpost last month. Things have evolved a bit and now Retraction bot handles Erratum, Expression of concern, and Retracted. These populate the following categories:


 * Category:Articles citing retracted publications
 * 1) Academic authorship
 * 2) Environmental Sciences Europe
 * 3) Food and Chemical Toxicology
 * 4) International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health
 * 5) Nature (journal)
 * 6) PLOS One
 * 7) Scientific Reports
 * 8) Virology Journal
 * Category:Articles citing publications with expressions of concern
 * 1) No journal-related articles
 * Category:Articles citing publications with errata
 * 1) No journal-related articles

If the citation is no longer reliable, then the article needs to be updated, which could be as minor as the removal/replacement of the citation with a reliable one, to rewriting an entire section that was based on flawed premises. If the citation to a retracted paper was intentional, like in the context of a controversy noting that a paper was later retracted, you can replace with / with / with.

I put the list of articles within the scope of WP:JOURNALS in sub-bullets. Feel free to remove/strike through those you've dealt with. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Wonderful addition to the encyclopedia. Thank you. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 03:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I second that, thanks ! --Randykitty (talk) 07:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)