762:, in the WP sense of providing secondary, independent coverage. GScholar search returns only 94 hits, and virtually all of them to this journal itself, or mirrors; there appear to be only a scant, few references to it within other journal articles. GNews returns a solitary hit, to the journal's own website. GEverything returns links to the journal; announcements of the journal's founding and new issues; calls for papers; people's CV's who've written for or edited the journal. Nothing
360:
the newsletter endorses the journal or even recommends its members to publish there. The only "screening" about what goes into a newsletter is a quick read-through and only if somebody would write crazy stuff would it be weeded out. This is why I don't think that an announcement in a newsletter amounts to much concerning notability. --
510:
The journal does not claim to be "unique" but it does claim to be distinguished by *not* being a pure academic research journal but rather a practitioner journal produced by and for engaged scholars *and* movement practitioners. In this respect the question of its notability is not simply a question
359:
new journal in the field of interest would be mentioned in such a newsletter. The people making those newsletters are generally starved for copy and would probably ask someone connected with such a new journal to write something about it. This does absolutely not mean that the organization publishing
546:
The "Mid" importance parameter was added by the article creator and, in any case, has no bearing on this discussion whatsoever. As for the "inaccurate" claim, I still have to see independent reliable sources. I don't think that "not being a pure academic research journal" is enough of a claim of
378:
The last comment is inaccurate in this case. The
International Sociological Association is a very substantial organisation (more details in its WP article), and its newsletter (translated into 6 languages other than English) reflects this. The editors are in no way starved of copy, nor does it
183:
This article is about a relatively new journal, that is claimed to be unique and one of only 4 journals "devoted to social movements". PROD was denied, but there are no independent sources (the external links given are either to the journal itself or to sources that are no necessarily
333:
It's one way to look at this, sure. Or you could look at it the way I do: it is a mention in the top professional association that certainly does screen what appears in its newsletter. As such, I think that ISA newsletter confers a significant degree of notability.
441:
First, there is no evidence that this was solicited, second, that it was solicited just confirms my remark about editors of newsletters continuously trawling for copy. If this newsletter had thought this journal so important, they would have written a review of it
152:
511:
of its unusual features *as academic journal* but also *as social movement publication*, hence the inclusion of a list of notable activists and intellectuals who have published in it (and a link to its debate with David Harvey, also notable.--
86:
81:
90:
73:
146:
565:
I think we're talking at cross-purposes. My point is rather that the
Interface entry should not simply be evaluated by the criteria for academic journals, as it is programmatically not simply an academic
754:, noting that an article of his had been debated in the journal, and providing links to same. While these may be useful sources of information about the subject, they are not useful for establishing
251:(how can this be not reliable?). Despite its newness, it is one of the few journals in the field of social movement studies, and it is known in the field (as shown by the above mentions). --
315:
Newsletters are often less stringently edited than othe things. In the present case, the link you refer to is an announcement about the journal by one of the people involved with it. --
77:
221:
113:
69:
61:
547:
uniqueness to meet WP:NJournals#3. As explained in the nom, the fact that notable people have published in the journal is irrelevant, as notability is not inherited. --
464:
Can you point me to a single review of a journal published in this newsletter? Till you do, I'd assume that soliciting such articles is the norm for ISA newsletter. --
167:
134:
355:
I can see why you would think this, but that is not the way these things work. Newsletters are intended to inform members of anything that might be of interest.
276:
of the
International Sociological Association. While this confirms that it exists (which is not in doubt anyway), it does not confer any notability at all. --
775:
734:
713:
683:
647:
626:
604:
575:
556:
537:
520:
476:
455:
432:
414:
392:
369:
346:
324:
306:
285:
263:
236:
213:
55:
128:
124:
248:
174:
585:
423:
Sure, but this doesn't address the question discussed above as to the significance of the ISA soliciting and publishing this article.--
17:
188:). Apparently not indexed in any major database. Some notable persons have published in the journal, but, of course, notability is
140:
589:
790:
36:
771:
294:
I don't follow. Some parts of ISA's website confer notability, and some - like the newsletter - don't? How so? --
189:
789:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
379:
mention every new journal related to sociology. In this case the article was solicited by the ISA's president,
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
232:
747:
571:
533:
516:
428:
388:
751:
193:
766:
that I could see. And given that it was founded only two years ago, notability can hardly be assumed. --
767:
709:
730:
160:
694:
669:
247:. I believe that the journal is notable. It is mentioned by numerous other sources; including the
228:
641:
598:
567:
529:
512:
470:
424:
384:
340:
300:
257:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
635:
What a wonderful argument. Let me reply, countering, that "this obviously does meet that." --
622:
552:
451:
410:
365:
320:
281:
209:
52:
755:
614:
197:
705:
680:
380:
763:
759:
402:
185:
726:
743:
637:
594:
466:
336:
296:
253:
506:.It is inaccurate to claim that there are no independent sources (as noted above).
107:
528:
I note also that WikiProject
Sociology rates this article as of mid-importance.--
618:
548:
447:
406:
361:
316:
277:
205:
49:
697:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
672:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
783:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
590:
Knowledge (XXG):Notability_(books)#Academic_and_technical_books
746:
by a member of the journal's collective; another member's
103:
99:
95:
159:
748:
description of the journal and invitation to join it
742:. Three references are provided in the article: an
704:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
679:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
222:
list of Social science-related deletion discussions
173:
70:
Interface: a journal for and about social movements
62:
Interface: a journal for and about social movements
725:per the well-articulated arguments of Piotrus. --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
793:). No further edits should be made to this page.
617:applies. This obviously does not meet that. --
8:
220:Note: This debate has been included in the
219:
744:announcement/description of the journal
613:In the absence of specific guidelines,
586:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (magazines)
249:International Sociological Association
638:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
595:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
467:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
337:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
297:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
254:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
735:17:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
714:05:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
684:21:50, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
648:22:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
627:09:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
605:01:18, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
576:23:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
557:09:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
538:23:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
521:23:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
477:22:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
456:09:48, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
433:00:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
415:10:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
393:23:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
370:17:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
347:15:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
325:09:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
307:18:14, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
286:16:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
264:16:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
237:14:15, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
214:12:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
1:
776:16:18, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
56:20:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
810:
786:Please do not modify it.
592:would be of some use? --
32:Please do not modify it.
272:It is mentioned in a
752:professor's website
584:I am not aware of
44:The result was
758:, which requires
716:
686:
239:
225:
801:
788:
760:reliable sources
703:
699:
678:
674:
644:
601:
473:
343:
303:
260:
226:
192:. Does not meet
178:
177:
163:
111:
93:
34:
809:
808:
804:
803:
802:
800:
799:
798:
797:
791:deletion review
784:
768:Hobbes Goodyear
692:
667:
646:
642:
603:
599:
475:
471:
381:Michael Burawoy
345:
341:
305:
301:
262:
258:
120:
84:
68:
65:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
807:
805:
796:
795:
779:
778:
737:
719:
718:
717:
701:
700:
689:
688:
687:
676:
675:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
659:
658:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
650:
636:
630:
629:
608:
607:
593:
579:
578:
560:
559:
541:
540:
508:
507:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
465:
459:
458:
436:
435:
418:
417:
396:
395:
373:
372:
350:
349:
335:
328:
327:
310:
309:
295:
289:
288:
267:
266:
252:
241:
240:
181:
180:
117:
64:
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
806:
794:
792:
787:
781:
780:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
749:
745:
741:
738:
736:
732:
728:
724:
721:
720:
715:
711:
707:
702:
698:
696:
691:
690:
685:
682:
677:
673:
671:
666:
665:
649:
645:
639:
634:
633:
632:
631:
628:
624:
620:
616:
612:
611:
610:
609:
606:
602:
596:
591:
587:
583:
582:
581:
580:
577:
573:
569:
564:
563:
562:
561:
558:
554:
550:
545:
544:
543:
542:
539:
535:
531:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
518:
514:
505:
502:
501:
478:
474:
468:
463:
462:
461:
460:
457:
453:
449:
445:
440:
439:
438:
437:
434:
430:
426:
422:
421:
420:
419:
416:
412:
408:
404:
400:
399:
398:
397:
394:
390:
386:
382:
377:
376:
375:
374:
371:
367:
363:
358:
354:
353:
352:
351:
348:
344:
338:
332:
331:
330:
329:
326:
322:
318:
314:
313:
312:
311:
308:
304:
298:
293:
292:
291:
290:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
270:
269:
268:
265:
261:
255:
250:
246:
243:
242:
238:
234:
230:
229:Osubuckeyeguy
223:
218:
217:
216:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
190:not inherited
187:
176:
172:
169:
166:
162:
158:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
133:
130:
126:
123:
122:Find sources:
118:
115:
109:
105:
101:
97:
92:
88:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
66:
63:
60:
58:
57:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
785:
782:
739:
722:
693:
668:
568:Laurence Cox
530:Laurence Cox
513:Laurence Cox
509:
503:
443:
425:Laurence Cox
385:Laurence Cox
356:
273:
244:
201:
194:WP:NJournals
182:
170:
164:
156:
149:
143:
137:
131:
121:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
147:free images
756:notability
706:Moogwrench
681:Courcelles
643:talk to me
600:talk to me
588:. Perhaps
566:journal.--
472:talk to me
444:themselves
342:talk to me
302:talk to me
274:newsletter
259:talk to me
727:Arxiloxos
200:, hence:
750:; and a
695:Relisted
670:Relisted
186:reliable
114:View log
48:. v/r -
153:WP refs
141:scholar
87:protect
82:history
740:Delete
619:Crusio
615:WP:GNG
549:Crusio
448:Crusio
407:Crusio
362:Crusio
317:Crusio
278:Crusio
206:Crusio
202:delete
198:WP:GNG
125:Google
91:delete
764:WP:RS
403:WP:42
168:JSTOR
129:books
108:views
100:watch
96:links
16:<
772:talk
731:talk
723:Keep
710:talk
623:talk
572:talk
553:talk
534:talk
517:talk
504:Keep
452:talk
446:. --
429:talk
411:talk
405:. --
401:See
389:talk
366:talk
321:talk
282:talk
245:Keep
233:talk
210:talk
161:FENS
135:news
104:logs
78:talk
74:edit
383:.--
357:Any
196:or
175:TWL
112:– (
774:)
733:)
712:)
625:)
574:)
555:)
536:)
519:)
454:)
431:)
413:)
391:)
368:)
334:--
323:)
284:)
235:)
227:—
224:.
212:)
204:.
155:)
106:|
102:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
80:|
76:|
770:(
729:(
708:(
640:|
621:(
597:|
570:(
551:(
532:(
515:(
469:|
450:(
427:(
409:(
387:(
364:(
339:|
319:(
299:|
280:(
256:|
231:(
208:(
179:)
171:·
165:·
157:·
150:·
144:·
138:·
132:·
127:(
119:(
116:)
110:)
72:(
53:P
50:T
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.