From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/4744
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: jim stasheff <jds@math.upenn.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories
Subject: Re: citation indices
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:26:13 -0500
Message-ID: <E1LA6yi-0002t1-RY@mailserv.mta.ca>
Reply-To: jim stasheff <jds@math.upenn.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241020145 14662 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2009 15:49:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:49:05 +0000 (UTC)
To: Categories list <categories@mta.ca>
Original-X-From: rrosebru@mta.ca Tue Dec  9 14:13:12 2008 -0400
Return-path: <categories@mta.ca>
Envelope-to: categories-list@mta.ca
Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:13:12 -0400
Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61)
	(envelope-from <categories@mta.ca>)
	id 1LA6yi-0002t1-RY
	for categories-list@mta.ca; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:06:37 -0400
Original-Sender: categories@mta.ca
Precedence: bulk
X-Keywords: 
X-UID: 50
Original-Lines: 42
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:4744
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/4744>

George,

I'vwe had a prompt reply from Ewing on the general issue
so far none from MR

will try again

jim
 Janelidze wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> The discussion on citation indices is interesting and important, but may I
> protest a bit?:
>
> Of course we all know that it does not make sense to judge mathematicians by
> numbers of publications and/or citations. But it does not mean that the
> number (and the list) of citations on your and my papers given in
> Mathematical Reviews should be
>
> the number (and the list) of citations in non-category-theory journals!
>
> Therefore the task number one here is not to argue about general
> improvements of various indices, but to convince Mathematical Reviews to
> include TAC, Cahiers, and APCS in what Mathematical Reviews calls "Reference
> List Journals". Jim, any success?
>
> If it is as bad as Michael Barr says, well, it least we will know that we
> made an attempt - and then, who knows, may be Categorical Reviews will be
> created one day...
>
> Next, if you allow me to propose task number two, it could be to try again
> (using MR) to include the same journals to various lists including
> Thompson's list (APCS is already there though) - not because it will help us
> to judge ourselves and each other, but simply because there are those funny
> bureaucratic requirements of many universities in many countries.
>
> George Janelidze
>
>