WikiProject Academic Journals	(Rated Stub-Class)	Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
v • d • e 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.  Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

WikiProject Psychology	(Rated Stub-Class)	PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Psychology portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.  Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

	WikiProject Resource Exchange	Resource ExchangeWikipedia:WikiProject Resource ExchangeTemplate:WikiProject Resource ExchangeResource Exchange articles
v • d • e If you have access to this resource, or if you need to verify a citation from this reference, check out WikiProject Resource Exchange. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.

[edit] Date of founding?

I arrived here from Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence, which discusses an editorial which appears to have been (re)published in this journal in 1997, yet this page claims that the journal was founded in 2000. I suspect there may be transfers from one publisher to another involved or similar. Does anyone know and can they edit the article(s) to remove the inconsistency? Martinp (talk) 23:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] editorial board

I was asked to have a look. There is fairly general agreement here that the listing of all the members of an editorial board, no matter how distinguished, is promotional. (the only person who disagreed in the last discussion seems to have been representing a journal publisher). It is additionally wrong to use external links within the body of an article in any context at all for people who do not have Wikipedia pages-- see WP:EL This is not encyclopedic information--it is perfectly visible on the publisher's site, which is where it belongs. If the publisher wishes, he is certainly encouraged to link distinguished scientist's names on his site to their Wikipedia biographies. That's a reasonable use of Wikipedia. We are here for the purpose of providing information about notable people for use wherever it is wanted. We are not here for the purpose of providing internal links to puff out an article--and a journal like this that hardly needs it.

What it does need is:

1. a list of all former editors in chief
2. Clarification of just what is the first issue, and the frequency of publication.
3. The current impact factor from JCR, and, if desired, number of articles published.
4. Circulation figures, which can be sourced from various places, including Ulrich's
5. The major indexing services in its field that include it.
6. The number of libraries having subscriptions
7. references to the journal itself in other published works.
8. just possibly, a list of the two or three most famous articles that have been published in the journal. (the fame can be taken to be = most cited, in order to have a reference for the fact)

DGG (talk) 22:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)