Obscure Publications

[Andreas Gminder]

The real problem is TODAY. Desktop publishing has become so easy and
cheap, a lot of people
are beginning to generate their own journals. And getting an ISSN number
is simple. I know
of at least 3 new *scientific* journals that have started in my
speciality recently. AND NO
PUBLIC LIBRARY HAS COPIES of these journals.
=========================================================

I don't know of the laws in other countries, but in Germany it is
required to deposite two copies in two public libraries (I don't know
their names, sorry) when proposing a ISSN-number for a certain journal.
So, even when the editor does not want to distribute his/her journal, at
least in these two libraries copies can be obtained on loan.
But I can't say whether these libraries check the further obtaining of
this journal. So probably it is not sure if you REALLY can obtain all
outgiven issues, but at least it SHOULD be like that ...

In my opinion there should be a RULE by the Code (not only a
recommandation) that at least the articles dealing with new species
(genera, families, etc.) MUST be reviewed by at least one (or two?)
other collegue(s). Of course this would not stop the possibility of
publishing new species in a, let's name it "unfortunate", way. But it
would make it a lot more uncomfortable for those wanting to avoid
critical questions, whereas most serious publications are reviewed
anyway, be it by someone from the editorial board of the publishing
journal or by a collegue of own choice.


Andreas Gminder - Stuttgart - Germany