Talk:List of statistics journals

Possible addition

I think the RSS magazine "Significance" could be added here, but some might think it is not quite a journal although it does have good quality articles on general statistics. See [1], [2] if unfamiliar with this. Any thoughts? Melcombe (talk) 10:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding Significance is a good idea. I have been impressed with the scientific and expository quality of the few issues of Significance I've seen. 17:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I will create an article under the title Significance (journal) to avoid a possible conflict of meaning. Melcombe (talk) 13:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, and I see that others had already anticipated this title for the article. Melcombe (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Organize Template:Statistics journals by topic?

I propose that we reorganize the Template:Statistics journals by including only the highest-rated journals in general statistics (JRSS, AoS, Biometrika?, J Multivariate analysis, J. Stat. Plan. Inf., Sankhya, JASA, Statisticia Scienica, etc.) and then in specialities: in biological-health statistics (Biometrika?, Biometrics, etc.) in business and economics (Econometrica, JBES, etc.), in quality and engineering statistics (Technometrics, etc.). Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC) Also, I would suggest collapsing the highest branch in this List of scientific journals in statistics --- open access or not --- as being of lesser interest. (If somebody wants to make a list of open-access stats journals, that might be useful.) Thanks, Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

• If you have the requisite knowledge, go ahead. I'd suggest building it in a sandbox. Open access journal lists are a magnet for spam. Abductive (reasoning) 20:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed the highest division (open access versus not) and then moved econometrics into social sciences. I then hid the red (broken) links. Now I can look at this page without a headache. Thanks Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought you were going to work on Template:Statistics journals? It too is organized by Open Source/not Open source. Abductive (reasoning) 23:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I decided that that template served a purpose for open-access fans, but not for statistics journals, and so moved it just now. I want to clean-up this page, e.g. updating the impact factors and adding the missing leading journals, and then create a new journal template. Could you suggest a method for coming up at a short list of journals? ThanksKiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 01:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you have the impact factors, and know some leading missing journals, add them. Finding out which ones are the leading journals presents a problem. Wikipedia is supposed to use secondary sources to decide these things, but there is a paucity of information on the ranking of journals below the big names. I've found this source, [3] and then there's this. Abductive (reasoning) 05:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I have added some discussion to Template talk:Open access statistics journals which is really where discussion of the template should be. Note that Template:Statistics journals presently actually redirects to Template:Open access statistics journals which is slightly complicating. Melcombe (talk) 10:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

In regard to this article, I note that there are no statistics teaching journals (yet). The corresponding lists for maths have a separate list at List of scientific journals in mathematics education, but a list for statistics may be too short to separate out. Also the "statistics" section of List of scientific journals might be checked. Melcombe (talk) 10:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

RfC on journal list names

There is an RfC regarding the standardization of journal lists names. Please comment at Talk:List of journals#RFC. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)