Talk:Global Policy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
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.
 
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Notability[edit]

Dear User:Crusio I made this article when looking for something to see if Gil-Sung Park was notable or not and it seemed given he was an editor of this - and given how notability this journal seemed to me he must be. This journal's notability seems to me not based on - it being well established - it being new - rather all the big names associated with it. This linking of academia with big names seems an interesting development. That was why I included a selected list of the big names involved.

Do you think the inclusion of something about the following endorsments from these big names help? http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/about/endorsements

"I think that this initiative gives a fresh, helpful and innovative way of looking at the current global world. Bringing together the analysis of academics and the expertise of practitioners is needed today more than ever." Narcís Serra (President, Barcelona Centre for International Affairs)

"Global Policy provides timely analysis of the important global debates of our time. Those who follow world affairs will not want to miss it." George Soros (Chairman of Soros Fund Management, LLC and founder of The Open Society Institute)

"The global economic crisis has shown once again why even the largest nations need global cooperation to formulate policy. The world is ready for ‘Global Policy.’" Kemal Dervis (Vice President and Director of Global Economy and Development, Brookings Institute)

"I would like to commend you for taking this important initiative. The world badly needs innovative solutions, involving both the public and private sector, to a wide range of pressing global challenges. To that end, a journal that brings together the world of academics and practitioners is most welcome." Javier Solana (High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union)

Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC))

  • I'm sorry, but I don't think that will establish notability either. There have been large discussion at the WP Project Academic Journals about whether "big names" associated with an editorial board and such establish notability and the consensus (based on WP:NOTINHERITED) was that it does not. What will establish notability, even for a very new journal, is coverage in independent reliable sources. Given the newness of this journal, it is unlikely such exist, but if you can find some, I'll remove the PROD template immediately. Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Dear User:Crusio, I have had a quick look at the debate on whether having notable editors etc is relevant Wikipedia talk:Notability (academic journals)- and I would tend to think that having notable editors might have a role. It seems to me in the case of this journal - that is part of what is establishes its notability. I am not sure if your claiming of the establishment of a consensus around your view is so clear and I doubt if this is the kind of "fringe" journal that people want excluded/deleted.
Is the notability of those writing in the journal possibly a better way to go to satisfy you? Or the publisher - LSE and John Wiley? If you don't think we can do much to save it can we restore the list of "notables" for the deletion process? Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC))
  • As you see, DGG has removed the PROD tag. I don't agree with his reasoning (which, I think, violates WP:NOTINHERITED), but not enough to take this to AfD. I have tweaked the article here and there. As for the discussion I referred to, if you look closely, you'll see that there was just one stubborn editor who kept arguing about the value of including "big names" on the board in an article, everybody else thought it should not be done, which means there was "consensus", albeit no "unanimity". Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 03:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  • PS: perhaps you can find independent coverage of those simultaneous lunch events? That would help in establishing notability in a more regular way. --Crusio (talk) 03:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Notability[edit]

Some things that might help

(removed duplicate comments - I think I must be in too much of rush these days as mistakes are mounting - but so many things are up for deletion and too little time to save things) (Msrasnw (talk) 15:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC))

  • Msrasnw, I don't think that usability stats establish notability. Such stats are not mentioned in any notability guideline that I know about. In fact, I think this is mentioned as an "argument to avoid during AfD", indicating that it is not pertinent at all. In addition, 4500 downloads in a single month is not all that much for a whole issue. If you compare this with, for example, the download stats of BioMed Central journals (which generally have a much more limited scope than GP and would therefore be expected to appeal to a much smaller audience), you will see that often a single article will have thousands of downloads in a single month. As for the links you post above, the last one is a blog, not a WP:RS (and just an in-passing mention by an author of his own GP article). The other two are just news items from, granted, respected universities, but they would never have paid any attention to this if some of their faculty were not involved. That may indicate possible notability in the future, but for the moment: WP;NOTCRYSTAL and WP:NOTINHERITED apply. --Crusio (talk) 16:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear - and sorry for my inaccuracy with the Huffington Post - I based it on this: Only a New Global System Can Handle a World of Explosive Risk - The Huffington Post This contribution draws on an article Ian Goldin has written for Global Policy the innovative new journal edited by LSE Global Governance co-director David Held, Eva-Maria Nag and Patrick Dunleavy and published by Wiley-Blackwell. The first issue of Global Policy is published this month. Ian Goldin is the Director of the James Martin 21st Century School at Oxford University and a former Vice President of the World Bank. From here http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/global/1news1.htm

It seems to me a bit odd if our policy is such that an article on a journal such as this - with all these famous people involved and articles by a former UK minister and General Petraeus and support of all those famous people on the boards - should not have a page. In fact I think this might be one where we might use our policy of ignore the rules and go with common sense might be in order. People might well look for this journal and this page might help - anyway perhaps this might be another one for Afd debate and then deletion and then recreation. Anyway best wishes? (Msrasnw (talk) 16:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)) PS Would public lectures run by Global Policy with Amartya Sen and Slavoj Žižek help?

  • Don't worry, I don't intend to take this to AfD, but I think the tag should stay until notability has been firmly established. All that those famous people do is making it likely that this will become notable, but their involvement alone does not render this notable. What is needed is independent tertiary sources that establish notability in the usual sense. --Crusio (talk) 16:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for not going for Afd and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC))