However, in the freshly published issue 6 (Volume 16/2009) of the Journal of European Public Policy - one of the most important political science journals on EU affairs - there is an article by Sabine Saurugger (pp. 935–949) titled "Sociological Approaches in EU Studies" where on page 941 you find the following sentence:
"[T]he hypothesis of a creeping depoliticization of the EU is questioned, not only since the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by the French and the Dutch but already between 1980 and 1990."Since you readers are EU geeks, you will have immediately noticed that the French and the Dutch have rejected the Constitutional Treaty, not the Lisbon Treaty, which was rejected by the Irish.
This obvious mistake is the more remarkable if one considers that several notable scientists have read the article before it was published, including the peer reviewer:
"The author would like to thank F[.] Mérand, O[.] Rozenberg, A[.] Menon, the anonymous reviewer, and in particular Berthold Rittberger for their extremely perceptive comments on earlier versions of this article." (footnote 1)I'd say that such a mistake is neither the best advertisement for a peer-reviewed journal nor for the scientist involved in and around the article.
I hope that this is not a general indication of the quality in peer-reviewed journals but just a mistake that happened in the current hype around the Lisbon Treaty ratification...