Talk:Journal of Law and Commerce

Notability & references

This article references only its own and related web sites. It makes no claim to notability. I would think that identifying articles published in the subject journal that were contributed by notable scholars or that are widely cited would be a way to make a claim of notability even if no direct references to the publication are available. Bongomatic (talk) 17:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Precedence for notability of law journals is well established (See Category:Law journals), let alone for one translated into several languages. Reference added for citation ranking/impact factor. CrazyPaco (talk) 22:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

What does "widely cited" mean? The being in the 25th percentile of citations from all law journals, as you noted below, would indicate widely cited to me. What is the basis for establishing Your criteria of "widely cited"? CrazyPaco (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I got a 25th percentile ranking using the link provided. It is unclear. But top-third seems to me intrinsically NON-notable--is it suggested that one third of all law journals are automatically notable because of their ranking?! Bongomatic (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Notability based on the stringent requirements to join the Journal: "To maintain the Journal's high standard of excellence, members are selected based on their superior legal research, reasoning, and writing abilities, through academic performance in the top 15% of their first or second year of study at the School of Law. Members are also selected through submission of a qualifying Note/Comment during the annual writing competition conducted in conjunction with the other law school publications. "--HoboJones (talk) 04:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no logic to this comment. Having qualified editors is not a demonstration of notability.04:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I expect your criteria to be applied equally across all law journal related articles. Since it is not, I suspect there may be bias in your application of notability tags. Clearly this international law journal is notable by previously established criteria that is evidenced by in Category:Law journals. Your opinion on notability does not trump Wikipedia:Consensus built by Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals where all professional indexed academic journals have been deemed notable (and survived almost all AFDs). If you want to send it up for AFD, feel free to do so and we'll let the AFD process run its course, but I would expect that you also will likewise AFD all the other law journals that have even less in their article entry than the Journal of Law and Commerce. BWI, I'm not in the field of law so I have no idea which cases or contributors would be significant that have been published in this journal (perhaps HoboJones can add information here), but I am well aware of criteria for notability for other indexed academic journals in wikipedia. In my opinion, multilingual translation of presented cases is beyond the norm of most academic journals and would signify the international academic significance of these cases. Very few journals publish translations of their articles (none that I know of in medicine or science). I dislike it when editors throw around notability tags in an uneven basis (espeically when the article belongs to a well established category). I'm not denying an issue of overall notability within the scope of academic journals could be a legitimate issue, I just do not like when it individual articles are singled out from their peer articles without apparent criteria for their discrimination. However, I will not again revert your application of the notability tag to this article if you decide to apply it (although I would better respect an even notability distribution across similar articles on law journals), as this (and other) stub article(s) clearly could benefit from additional information. CrazyPaco (talk) 16:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that this has enough notability to survive AFD. The fact that is is an established (28+ years) competitive law journal at an ABA-accredited law school is enough. Harvard Law Review, it is not, but that doesn't make it not notable.--HoboJones (talk) 19:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Journal of Law and Commerce. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101020131006/http://jlc.law.pitt.edu/about.html to http://jlc.law.pitt.edu/about.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)