The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable journal. No independent sources, not indexed in any selective major databases. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Prod was contested by the journal's editor. VQuakr ( talk) 08:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC) reply
Here is the link to the EBSCO Business Source Complete listing: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=dbaff0ab-7a27-4937-9109-83e546307020%40sessionmgr110&vid=1&hid=106&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=bth&jid=2ZJI ProQuest ABI/Inform Complete: http://search.proquest.com/publication/43244# JSTOR: citations are common for the short name of the journal as well: "Group+Facilitation": http://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicResults?hp=25&la=&so=rel&wc=on&fc=off&acc=off&acc=off&bk=off&pm=off&jo=off&ar=off&re=off&ms=off&gw=jtx&Query=%22Group+Facilitation%22&sbq=%22Group+Facilitation%22&prq=%22Group+Facilitation+A+Research+and+applications+journal%22&mxpg=11&aori=off&vf=jo
I'm not sure what is meant by 'not major' and 'not selective', but when Proquest approached us for listing in 2006 and EBESCO in 2007 they were two of the major indices around. I do appreciate things have changed in such a long period of time since. They did select our journal for listing, not the other way around. I know you won't necessarily appreciate Google Scholar as a valuable third party source however, here are the citations on what is predominantly a closed access journal: http://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar?as_q=&as_publication=group+facilitation The journal has been submitted to Scopus, which can take up to 6 months for review I believe. One key challenge we have faced as an Editorial Board in listing on the Web of Science is the requirement for access to the password protected members-only section of the iaf-world.org website. The IAF Board were not so keen on access to the members-only section going to an unnamed individual for the purposes of an index listing. By "Reader Requests" I mean here's one example from Belgrade in Serbia:
Email with subject line "Wikipedia pages"
|
---|
--- On Fri, 8/10/12, <Name_Deleted> <<Name_Deleted>@gmail.com> wrote: From: <Name_Deleted> <<Name_Deleted>@gmail.com> Subject: Wikipedia pages To: "Stephen Thorpe" Date: Friday, August 10, 2012, 9:35 PM Hi Stephen. Hope you are well - sure you are busy :) I recently discovered that there wasn't a page about IAF on Wikipedia and so I just created one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_of_Facilitators I checked to see if there was an entry for the journal on Wikipedia and see that there isn't, so I wondered if you might want to create one. There are quite a few guidelines about creating Wikipedia pages but most of them seem to boil down to making it informational and neutral rather than promotional and partial. I wondered if you might want to create a page for the Journal. Best regards, <Name_Deleted> -- <Name_Deleted> MA Human Security & Peacebuilding, Certified Professional Facilitator Share in building hope at http://hopebuilding.pbworks.com and http://hopebuilding.wordpress.com View my pictures: <Name_Deleted> Visit http://hopebuilding.wordpress.com/ |
Can you please advise: I don't want to waste anyone's time - should I just wait until it's listed in Scopus and then come back as it will then meet the notoriety requirement? I can address the need for adding independent references to and possibly from the article if allowed. Stephenthorpe ( talk) 19:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Stephen reply
Would references in other books qualify? facilitator blogs? review articles on academic journals? It's a reasonably niche arena for academic journals on groupwork and GFJ is the only international one and it's published by the global association in this emerging professional arena with 1,300+ members in over 70 countries. If Scopus or Web of Science is all that counts and EBSCo and ProQuest, Google scholar have issues then I'm not sure there is any opening for possibility made available here? 222.154.11.12 ( talk) 09:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Stephen reply
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable journal. No independent sources, not indexed in any selective major databases. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Prod was contested by the journal's editor. VQuakr ( talk) 08:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC) reply
Here is the link to the EBSCO Business Source Complete listing: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=dbaff0ab-7a27-4937-9109-83e546307020%40sessionmgr110&vid=1&hid=106&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=bth&jid=2ZJI ProQuest ABI/Inform Complete: http://search.proquest.com/publication/43244# JSTOR: citations are common for the short name of the journal as well: "Group+Facilitation": http://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicResults?hp=25&la=&so=rel&wc=on&fc=off&acc=off&acc=off&bk=off&pm=off&jo=off&ar=off&re=off&ms=off&gw=jtx&Query=%22Group+Facilitation%22&sbq=%22Group+Facilitation%22&prq=%22Group+Facilitation+A+Research+and+applications+journal%22&mxpg=11&aori=off&vf=jo
I'm not sure what is meant by 'not major' and 'not selective', but when Proquest approached us for listing in 2006 and EBESCO in 2007 they were two of the major indices around. I do appreciate things have changed in such a long period of time since. They did select our journal for listing, not the other way around. I know you won't necessarily appreciate Google Scholar as a valuable third party source however, here are the citations on what is predominantly a closed access journal: http://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar?as_q=&as_publication=group+facilitation The journal has been submitted to Scopus, which can take up to 6 months for review I believe. One key challenge we have faced as an Editorial Board in listing on the Web of Science is the requirement for access to the password protected members-only section of the iaf-world.org website. The IAF Board were not so keen on access to the members-only section going to an unnamed individual for the purposes of an index listing. By "Reader Requests" I mean here's one example from Belgrade in Serbia:
Email with subject line "Wikipedia pages"
|
---|
--- On Fri, 8/10/12, <Name_Deleted> <<Name_Deleted>@gmail.com> wrote: From: <Name_Deleted> <<Name_Deleted>@gmail.com> Subject: Wikipedia pages To: "Stephen Thorpe" Date: Friday, August 10, 2012, 9:35 PM Hi Stephen. Hope you are well - sure you are busy :) I recently discovered that there wasn't a page about IAF on Wikipedia and so I just created one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_of_Facilitators I checked to see if there was an entry for the journal on Wikipedia and see that there isn't, so I wondered if you might want to create one. There are quite a few guidelines about creating Wikipedia pages but most of them seem to boil down to making it informational and neutral rather than promotional and partial. I wondered if you might want to create a page for the Journal. Best regards, <Name_Deleted> -- <Name_Deleted> MA Human Security & Peacebuilding, Certified Professional Facilitator Share in building hope at http://hopebuilding.pbworks.com and http://hopebuilding.wordpress.com View my pictures: <Name_Deleted> Visit http://hopebuilding.wordpress.com/ |
Can you please advise: I don't want to waste anyone's time - should I just wait until it's listed in Scopus and then come back as it will then meet the notoriety requirement? I can address the need for adding independent references to and possibly from the article if allowed. Stephenthorpe ( talk) 19:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Stephen reply
Would references in other books qualify? facilitator blogs? review articles on academic journals? It's a reasonably niche arena for academic journals on groupwork and GFJ is the only international one and it's published by the global association in this emerging professional arena with 1,300+ members in over 70 countries. If Scopus or Web of Science is all that counts and EBSCo and ProQuest, Google scholar have issues then I'm not sure there is any opening for possibility made available here? 222.154.11.12 ( talk) 09:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Stephen reply