Talk:Journal of the Royal Society Interface

	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
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Royal Society Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Royal Society, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Royal Society 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.Royal SocietyWikipedia:WikiProject Royal SocietyTemplate:WikiProject Royal SocietyRoyal Society articles
Start	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.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Problems

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

We do not write in the first person. "You can submit" is promotional. Giving the link to submit articles is promotional also. I've fixed this.
We also do not give the links to individual issues of the journal. The journal has a website for the purpose. I've fixed this, too
We do not list the members of the editorial board; only the editor in chief. I've fixed this, too
It is acceptable to list certain noteworthy papers, but be prepared to show why they are noteworthy, as by citation count. When you do list them, include the full bibliographic references , not just the link. If the journal is published in paper also, it should be possible to find it in paper from the information given. See WP:CITE for the formats. I leave this for you.
Please double check that none of the prose, such as the list of subjects covered, is copied from the journal web site.
Have there been any references providing substantial coverage about this new journal from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. If so, add them. (I would imagine, for example, that it was mentioned in Nature). DGG (talk) 16:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Journal of the Royal Society Interface. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20100211181038/http://cassi.cas.org/search.jsp to http://cassi.cas.org/search.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic