Talk:Journal of Internal Medicine

	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.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Press coverage

See this search. Fences&Windows 22:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When it split

The source says 1901, but the archive places the rename in 1991. Fences&Windows 22:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

COI

A recent major contributor to this page, User:Bengt Fagrel, appears to have a COI, as self-declared here. Bengt is a new user, does not seem to have any bad intent, but COI should be declared and WP:COI acknowledged and followed. I have tagged the page for now. If I am incorrect I apologize in advance.Jytdog (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE NOTICE that my name is Bengt Fagrell Italic text!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bengt Fagrell (talk • contribs) 13:58, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bengt Fagrell

Hi Randy(Is this your first name?), First of all I would like to thank you and your co-workers extensive communication to try to teach me to use W in a correct manner! It is impressive. Now to the COI. We all, working with Journal of Internal Medicine (JIM), think it is extremely important to declare COI among ourselves in the journal, and I fully understand your concern about this in W! I am also happy to see that you do not think that I have a COI that can jeopardize my work with the JIM page in the future. The reason for our decision to make a page on W and give the information about JIM now is that the Journal is celebrating its 150 years anniversary, and because of this we have gathered a substantial amount of info about the Journal that we want 'the world' to get information about! So, as you most probaly have noticed, the conten is purely informative! Anyhow, here I now declare my COI with the W page on Journal of Internal medicine: 1/ I, Bengt Fagrell, have edited the article on Journal of Internal Medicine (JIM) 2/ I am at present the Deputy Editor-in-Chief of JIM 3/ In the future I will only make corrections of facts, and revert clear vandalism 4/ Furthermore, I will propose any further essential changes only on the Talk page of the article (which I think is the page I am in at present!), and wait for approval before any changes are made. (Bengt Fagrell (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)) Bengt Fagrell[reply]

Hi Bengt, well I'm not really a kitten (big surprise there :-) but Randy will do fine. The most important thing to remember is that for any edit, we need sources. At this point, there are two sections in the article for which the sourcing is unclear. Given the journal's jubilee, I suspect that this information comes from an article/book/bookchapter recently published on the history of the journal for that occasion. Is that correct? If so, I gues it is the (currently) first reference. That article is currently behind a pay wall. You might consider asking Wiley to make this article available for free for everybody, they generally are very open to this sort of request from journal editors. That way, it's easier for other editors here to verify things (and your journal's history will get more exposure at the same time). There are not that many scientific journals that are this old, so it would be nice to expand the article a bit with interesting tidbits. --Randykitty (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Randy, Although Journal of Internal Medicine is now an international journal I have to inform you that almost all of the information about the journal during the 150 years that the Journal have existed is in Swedish. There are only a few, not very good info sites that are in English. Consequently, almost all references that we can put in have to be in Swedish. As you may know there is a Swedish Wikipedia, and I have now put in one reference to that one. What does the English version of W say regarding references in other languages than English? Is that OK? Then to our Wiley website: Unfortunately, Wiley has made a mistake regarding the articles that belong to the journal’s jubilee issue! We have an agreement that all these articles should be free, but now only one of them is! We have informed Wiley about this, and hopefully they have adjusted that within the next 24 hours. I agree with you that we should perhaps try to expand the info on this page, and I will discuss this further with our editors. Once again thank you for your interest and help! All the best, Bengt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bengt Fagrell (talk • contribs) 14:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bengt, references to wikis are not allowed, as they are not reliable sources. However, sources in Swedish are perfectly acceptable. --Randykitty (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Randy, I have now included a key refference [1], which is a book of 147 pages that descibes the whole history of Journal of Internal Medicine. We have discussed if there are any other document that could be used as reference, but have come to the conclusion that there are none. Consequently, we would appreciate if you could delete the two sections that states that it "needs additional citations" as we cannot any more. Bengt Fagrell (talk) 09:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)Best, Bengt. More: I have talked to our publisher contact, and they are not happy that it is stated *Wiley-Blackwell' as the word 'Blackwell' has been definitely deleted now. They told me that the copany name is 'John Wiley & Sons', and that is the words that should be used from now on. I do not want to change this myself, but would appreciate if you could change it, and but in a link to their website. Bengt Fagrell (talk) 10:38, 27 November 2013 (UTC)Bengt[reply]

This is what the veryu own website of John and his Sons tells us. WP cannot source things to "they told us". They'll have to update their website first and then we can change the article here. --Randykitty (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]