Talk:Radical History Review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Radical History Review is notable in a way that many purely scholarly journals are not because it's goal is to influence political decisions, and it publishes articles written for that purpose.

I happened to be reading an article when the writer cited an article to RHR, then worte - whatever that is - I knew it only as a scholarly journal I sometimes see cited. I checked it out. It clearly has an agenda and has probably had sume success promoting ideas onto the political agenda.

Instead of deleting it, I wish some historian who knows the journal's track record would add material about it.

American Clio (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)American Clio

I'm looking. Relata refero (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

This journal has been a mainstay for at least 25 years in progressive/left of center academia, and is definitely as notable as much of what is in Wikipedia. It isn't hyperbolic the way something like a David Horowitz type publication is, nor does it have a dynamic web presence, but we shouldn;t confuse noise with notability! I can't research it adequately at the moment, but here is some background. Boodlesthecat (talk) 19:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, two of you have spoken up for it, and that's good enough for me. I also detect some mentions to it as representative of a certain stream of scholarship in peer-reviewed publications, so that should be good enough for anyone else. Removing my own prod. Relata refero (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)