Talk:European Economic Review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Economics (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Academic Journals (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Notability[edit]

Currently "what links here", shows 15 Wikipedia articles that refer to this item. Good enough. History2007 (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

  • No, it's not... I agree that this journal certainly is notable (it has a sizable impact factor and surely is listed in other selective databases - even though that info is not in the article), I disagree with your edit summary here. The number of wikilinks to an article is absolutely irrelevant for notability (otherwise some editor could create an article, insert wikilinks in a dozen other articles, and then claim that the thing is notable). WP cannot be used to source itself, nor can it be used to base notability on. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok, feel free to spend 2 days of your life to Afd it. I bet it has over 95% chance of survival. The links were independently inserted. Anyway, I will no longer watch this page. I started it just because it was missing. I do not even read that journal. History2007 (talk) 10:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Not so prickly... You didn't read my comment correctly. I started with saying that I agree that it is notable, just not for the reason that you gave. If anyone were foolish enough to take this to AfD, I'd be the first to !vote keep. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)