Talk:Confluenze

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 September 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Notability[edit]

I understand Confluenze does not satisfies criterion 3 of WP:NJournals, bit IMHO it falls under criterion 1 for the sum of the following facts:

citation in MLA, LatinIndex, Dialnet, CAPES, erevistas, portal de hispanismo
A class status from National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes
(truly) international editorial board
it publishes articles in 3 different languages and his audience is international (I have the data but they are not public, I understand this is not verifiable)

Thus, I would like to remove the deletion template. (full disclosure: i'm a long-time wikipedian and I had my fair share of wipe*edian discussions, so i very much like to avoid sterile arguments and so on. I'm also aware that there could be impression of WP:COI: I'm part of the technical staff of University of Bologna digital library, the office which manage also open access journals, as Confluenze. I very calmly think there is no COI involved, if the community decide Confluenze is not yet suitable for an article I will step back after a fair discussion and sleep well anyway. :-)). --Aubrey (talk) 10:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You basically give 4 arguments. To make things clearer, I have taken the liberty of numbering them and respond by number: 1/ As far as I can see, none of these database is both major and selective. 2/ The reference given is a bare list of journals, which is so extensive that it suggests that this is not very selective either. 3/ This is absolutely irrelevant to establiosh notability. Even some so-called "predatory" journals have an international board. 4/ This, too, is irrelevant for notability. In short, I don't think that notability has been established here. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the ANVUR lists contains roughly 2000 international journals, all selected by an international committee to be the core list for the Italian academy, and I bet this is not a large number for the whole amount of notable journals in the world. Wikipedia lists 3680 journals just in the English-language category. Obviously, this is my core argument, and the others are just additional (non trivial, to me, but I understand they don't suffice alone). --Aubrey (talk) 12:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That list is a bit strange anyway, because I cannot find, for example, Nature and Science in it (and from the whole Nature family, only Nature Neuroscience is listed). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, but that list is just for Area 11 (there are few list s divided per subject). Nature for example is here. Therefore, the ANVUR list contain more than just 2000 journals (and this seems about right). --Aubrey (talk) 12:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]