This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
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
I guess that the fact that this journal has "10 points" on a list of over 4000 journals from a Polish ministry means something to Polish academics. However, I doubt that >99% actually have any clue what this means. Whatever the scale (higher is better? Lower is better? Zero to 100? 1 to 10?), I doubt that the fact that a journal has a certain score that it share with >4000 other journals is very important. What we need are references that show that this journal either meets WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Piotrus, can you perhaps provide some assistance here? --Randykitty (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to translate article about list of journals from a Polish ministry [1], but Randykitty removed adequate link. I am really tired to provided something which is obvious that "Sobótka" is one of most important journals. Information about score of "Sobótka" is important to compare it with other historical journals. How many journals about history gain 10 or more points on this list? Kmicic (talk) 02:12, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It may be obvious to you that this is one of the most important journals, but not to an outsider. There's over 4000 journals on the list that you linked to, which all have 10 points, whatever that may mean. I had a look at the article on the list on the Polish WP (which has not a single independent source, so at this stage is not appropriate for an article here - note that different language wikis have different inclusion criteria). It also doesn't seem like "10 points" is actually that big a deal. In any case, such national lists tend to give higher scores to national publications than other listings would do, for obvious reasons (the list compilers wanting to support local publications, for example, or even being involved with those publications themselves). --Randykitty (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What link was removed? I don't understand what's preventing you for translating pl:Lista czasopism punktowanych przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego; it is a notable topic and I'd love to see it here. Then we could, with Randy's and other members of the AJWP, agree on which the notability treshold represented by that list. I certainly agree that at the very least, the 10% or so of the most highly ranked publications should be considered notable. Maybe more, it really depends on how do we treat other non-English impact lists like that (a discussion that should be better held at WikiProject's talk, not here)? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here02:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
