This article is related to the Johns Hopkins University WikiProject. Learn more about this collaborative project here.Johns Hopkins UniversityWikipedia:GLAM/Johns Hopkins UniversityTemplate:WikiProject Johns Hopkins UniversityJohns Hopkins University-related articles
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
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland 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.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
well, I am thinking about whether to revert that merge. Merges if not obvious need to be proposed first, see WP:MERGE. As for criteria for the validity of a separate list, see WP:LIST. As for other changes, I'm thinking about them. I remind you that nobody owns an article here. Please see also WP:BRD. I'm in fact a little gentler than that, and to save the trouble of the reversion, I urge you now to give your reasons. I'll notify the appropriate workgroup: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic JournalsDGG (talk) 02:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
As the sole creator, compiler and editor of the original list I felt its relevance would be better highlighted by the merge. In turn, I also felt that that the list would provide synergestic value to the publisher's article which had been merely a stub and bereft of any information of a substantive nature prior to my having edited it (temporally twice - pre and post merge). There are other University Press articles which are similar eg. MIT Press. If you feel if these reasons are insufficient, please let me know. As the person who originally created the list as a seperate entity I would not be averse to a revert if you deem it necessary. However, I do feel that the merge provides this article with additional sorely needed heft making it more profound and informative (as serves the purpose of Wikipedia) than most other press articles which merely "exist" and serve no practical or informative purpose.TennisGrandSlam (talk) 03:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
I noticed that the Lead Section contains an uncited claim about the organization's size and influence that may come across as personal interpretation or bias. It could be improved by adding a citation to a reliable source such as an independent academic award recognizing the organization over others for its large influence, or deleting the claim. Rlyantonio (talk) 23:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
