Talk:Open-access monograph
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
No independent notability
- @Lawsonstu: as far as I can see, an "open access monograph" is just the same thing as a monograph that happens to have been published OA. I don't see anything special or particular about this subject (which is, of course, why I redirected it to an appropriate target). --Randykitty (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- By that logic, open access journal should also not have it's own page? - Lawsonstu (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- It's a research topic in it's own right (e.g. [1] and there is a directory [2], same as for journals. - Lawsonstu (talk) 15:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- There's an abundant literature on OA journals. I dare say that is not the case for OA monographs. --Randykitty (talk) 15:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- If you're challenging notability you should tag it so instead of redirecting without discussion. fgnievinski (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Redirecting something instead of tagging is quite a regular action and doesn't need discussion in advance. If it's challenged (like any other ordinary edit), you take it to the talk page. Please familiarize yourself with WP:BOLD. --Randykitty (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- It did seem fairly sourced, so claiming "no independent notability" because it receives less coverage than OA journals is a bit of a stretch IMO. Also, as noted in the article, OA books are unique at least in their business models. fgnievinski (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Redirecting something instead of tagging is quite a regular action and doesn't need discussion in advance. If it's challenged (like any other ordinary edit), you take it to the talk page. Please familiarize yourself with WP:BOLD. --Randykitty (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- If you're challenging notability you should tag it so instead of redirecting without discussion. fgnievinski (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- There's an abundant literature on OA journals. I dare say that is not the case for OA monographs. --Randykitty (talk) 15:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of open access projects which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of open-access projects which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:46, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
"DOAB" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect DOAB. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 21:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)