User talk:Chantal Schrama

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hi Chantal, welcome to Wikipedia. I saw that you changed the "editor" parameter of the infobox on the article BMGN: Low Countries Historical Review to read "Chair Editorial Team". An infobox uses a fixed template that displays in a certain way, and "Chair Editorial Team" is not one of the parameters it will recognise (you can find the parameters set out here: Template:Infobox_journal). You also changed the name of the editor from Catrien Santing to D. J. Wolffram. The only problem there is that the journal's own website currently gives the chair of the editorial board as Kaat Wils, and a quick Google search turned up no evidence to contradict that. I have updated the content of the infobox accordingly, but if they are simply slow to update their own website and the current editor is indeed D. J. Wolffram, there is no problem making that change, as long as it is supported from a reliable source. Unsourced changes to "DJ" anything will necessarily look dubious, especially if it is the sole edit a user has made. I hope this doesn't seem unwelcoming, and that you will continue contributing to Wikipedia. Useful guidance for doing so can be found at Help:Menu/Editing_Wikipedia. All the best! --Andreas Philopater (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your respond, I was a bit soon with changing it to D.J Wolffram he is already in charge however this will be made public in september. About the editor, maybe there is a better name for the function than edited by. Since the managing editor is Dr. Anne-Marie Mreijen and Kaat Wils is only charing the board of editors. Making it a bit unfair for the rest of the team perhaps? Hope you can provide me with a suggestion here, since I'm only a Wikipedia beginner. Chantal Schrama (talk)11:52, 26 June 2018

You seem to have inside information about how the journal works and who is running it, but Wikipedia really relies on information that is already public, so that any user can check it. I assume (from the outside) that most academic journals are a collective effort, and perhaps "edited by" doesn't cover this adequately, but that is a point to be raised at Template_talk:Infobox_journal (it can also be addressed in more detail in the article itself; the purpose of the infobox is just to give key information at a glance). Even so, is there not one person who is ultimately responsible for decisions about the journal's content? (To give an extreme case, who might be expected to resign if it turned out a fraudulent article had been accepted for publication, deeply damaging the journal's reputation.) Would that be the managing editor or the chair of the editorial board? If it would in fact be the collective responsibility of the editorial board, then "edited by" could be made to read "a board chaired by Name". At least that would be my thinking, but I'm no expert, and the best thing to do would be to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals, where there are no doubt people more familiar with these questions. On a second point, your inside knowledge suggests you might work for the journal, and if so you should identify yourself as an interested party when editing about it (see: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI). I hope this doesn't come across as too overwhelming after what must have seemed a quick and simple edit to reflect something that you know to be a fact even though it hasn't yet been publicised. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning "edited by", we habitually only list the chief editor. That is, the person who has final authority over the journal. Usually, that would be the editor-in-chief or the chair of the editorial board, as the title "managing editor" is usually reserved for a person (not necessarily even an academic) who supervises the daily processing of manuscripts, whether reviewers are late, and such. Think of it as a manager in a big company and their CEO. --Randykitty (talk) 11:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians also recommend biscuits with tea.

Andreas Philopater (talk) has given you a cup of tea. Tea promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.

Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

In the mean time, it seems that activity on the page has drawn the attention of Randykitty, who I'm sure will be able to answer any questions, and already seems to have a source for the current editor. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. It's actually announced at the right hand side of the journal's own website. It says that Wolffram will take over starting in September, so technically we should only change it then, but by then we might forget so I thought it would be acceptable to change this already now. Andreas Philopater, feel free to revert to the actual current editor if you think that we should wait until September. Happy editing to both of you! --Randykitty (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I just notice that this is the Twitter feed of the journal, so the announcement is not visible all the time... Perhaps I was too hasty to put Wolffram in. --Randykitty (talk) 11:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Randykitty! It doesn't show up on the website for me, but that might just be my browser, or me not having Twitter (or not having a Twitter extension in my browser). If it's public information that someone can cite it's good enough for me. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]