This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Serials crisis is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Serials crisis is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a collaborative attempt at improving Wikimedia content with the help of openly licensed materials and improving Wikipedia articles related to openness (including open access publishing, open educational resources, etc.). If you would like to participate, visit the project page for more information.
This article reads like a list of problems and proposed solutions, rather than like an encyclopedia article. It needs some serious reorganization to meet Wikipedia's article guidelines for a quality article. Furthermore, there are quite a lot of potentially debatable assertions that are not cited. — λ (talk) 18:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The article is not very balanced. I don't see, for example, the fact that researchers churn out ever more and more papers and the resulting increase in numbers of pages published (and, hence, publication cost) as a factor in the increase in the cost of many journals. In many instances, this size increase is larger than the price increases (so counting for inflation, many journals have actually become cheaper on a per page basis). Unfortunately, this is my own OR, so if somebody has a reference for this, it could be added to the journal to provide more balance. And publishers certainly have had a thing or two to say about this, so we need to cover their responses, too. Finally, the OA section not only doubles a lot from the article on open access (publishing), but also presents many opinions that are not substantiated in any way by sources. --Crusio (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
-Comment: I didn't write the article and it does have substantial problems, but make no mistake about it, the price increase of journals has much more to do with increased profit than any changes in journal size. The increase in size also has little impact on journals that are delivered electronically. Supporting that assertion is fairly difficult considering publishing companies will not release relevant data. However, having worked for the two largest scientific journal publishers in the world as en electronic development project manager, I can state it as an unequivocal fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2011 (UTC)