This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Academic Journals 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. Philosophy: Literature / Analytic / Continental / Contemporary Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophical literature Analytic philosophy Continental philosophy Contemporary philosophy

Since there are two JSPs (one 1867-1893, the other 1987-present), shouldn't there be two articles? 173.72.63.150 ( talk) 14:09, 10 May 2014 (UTC)The Honourable Ronald Adair reply

• Given that we hardly have anything to tell about the older journal, I don't see much problem in a combined article. The distcnction is sufficiently clear that things are not ambiguous. -- Randykitty ( talk) 14:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC) reply

"...we hardly have anything to tell about the older journal...." Why? The older journal is overflowing with interesting articles. To anyone interested in Idealism, they are a treasure. 173.72.63.150 ( talk) 03:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)The Honourable Ronald Adair reply

If there are sources that talk about all those "interesting articles" in-depth, then we can include that in an article about the journal. In the absence of such sources, "we hardly have anything to tell about the older journal". -- Randykitty ( talk) 02:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply