Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

cab67

(3,948 posts)

7. Neues Jahrbuch has a checkered history.

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 29, 2026, 07:51 PM

Jun 29

The level of peer-review some submissions were given was fairly light. I'm pretty sure the claim wouldn't have lasted had the manuscript been submitted to most other journals.

(You actually looked it up? Good on you!)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hoofed crocodiles! And thoughts on AI and online sources for independent research. [View all] cab67 Jun 29 OP

That's more than a few thoughts Fiendish Thingy Jun 29 #1

Not sure I agree. cab67 Jun 29 #3

Is there a particular reason for the ongoing misinformation war in your field of study? Fiendish Thingy Jun 29 #4

It's the enthusiasts I mentioned. cab67 Jun 29 #5

I can see the problem with Wikipedia - they cited the German publication article when adding the "bipedal" claim muriel_volestrangler Jun 29 #6

Neues Jahrbuch has a checkered history. cab67 Jun 29 #7

also - cab67 Jun 29 #8

thanks for your thoughts mike_c Jun 29 #2