Timeline for What are the most important Open Access Mathematics journals at present? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2017 at 21:12 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jul 19, 2017 at 1:06 | |||||
| Nov 3, 2009 at 1:11 | comment | added | axiomsofchoice | @Scott I'm not offended - far from it - but I am a little confused about the problems with the wording of this question. I'd be interested to know about your proposed changes - hopefully this might also be instructive for others writing similar questions. Best to continue this discussion via email though (my username at gmail). Don't get me wrong here, I really like what you guys are doing with this site but my guess is that as it (hopefully) continues to grow in popularity you're going to find it increasingly difficult to maintain the high level of editorial standards you've set for yourself. | |
| Nov 1, 2009 at 17:16 | comment | added | Kim Morrison | It's nice to see that closing a question doesn't necessarily offend the asker: twitter.com/axiomsofchoice/statuses/5337619766 | |
| Oct 31, 2009 at 19:15 | comment | added | Andreas Holmstrom | IMHO, this question is interesting and should be reopened. | |
| Oct 31, 2009 at 12:12 | comment | added | axiomsofchoice | @Anton - The question as written is exactly what I wanted to ask - it doesn't matter that I know about it, I want to know what the community respects. In composing it I used "Do good math jokes exist?", "Undergraduate Level Math Books" and "Most interesting mathematics mistake?" as models of what works well as a good mathoverflow question. I fail to see how they differ from the style of my question - are 'good' and 'interesting' less vague than 'important'? It would help if you could add some good vs. bad examples on the faq. As a community wiki it's ok that there's no answer to it (cf. faq). | |
| Oct 31, 2009 at 10:12 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Jason: fair point, but for my own modest efforts this really doesn't come into it. "Not being crap" and "putting corrected proof copies online ASAP" are the two most important factors for me at the moment. "Important" is just far, far too vague, and too subjective. | |
| Oct 31, 2009 at 4:28 | comment | added | Jason Dyer | re: "I don't read journals, I read papers." Yes, but you have to pick a journal to send your papers to. | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 23:10 | comment | added | Anton Geraschenko | I have to agree with Scott and Yemon. Not only is this a question that doesn't have an answer, I'm not even sure what the question is. What does "most important" mean. What kind of an answer are you looking for? I'm willing to reopen this question if it is edited to ask something specific. Perhaps what you really meant to ask is, "What are open-access journals I should know about? What distinguishes them from other journals? One journal per answer please. Vote up journals you really like (and leave a comment explaining why you like it, if possible)." | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 23:04 | history | closed | Anton Geraschenko | not a real question | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 22:01 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | I may be in a minority, but I don't read journals, I read papers. If a paper I hear of is interesting or relevant, then I'll go and see where I can find it. If I may ask the OP, why do you want to know which ones are "most important"? | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 21:12 | comment | added | Kim Morrison | This is borderline for mathoverflow.net. We really only want "questions which can be answered", and the way this question is asked, it is likely to warrant discussion rather than definitive answers. That said, if someone wants to produce a table of eigenfactors for known Open Access journals, I'd vote that up. | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 21:11 | history | edited | Kim Morrison |
edited tags
|
|
| Oct 30, 2009 at 21:10 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Kim Morrison | ||
| Oct 30, 2009 at 21:03 | history | asked | axiomsofchoice | CC BY-SA 2.5 |