The astronomy community usually turns to the Astrophysics Data System for bibliometrics. When the context is cross-disciplinary, commercial products like Web of Science and Scopus are used along with related analytics tools instead. The results are often tainted by inherent problems in the chosen classification system. A review of the most common challenges and pitfalls is given. Commercial altmetrics products could be added to the evaluation toolbox in the near future despite the fact that they are best suited for promotion instead of evaluation. Norway, Denmark, and Finland have created journal and publisher ranking systems that are used in national funding models. Differences in how astronomy journals are weighed in these systems night be related to the volume of papers published on a national level.

This is a follow-up on the bibliometric evaluation of Finnish astronomy presented by the author at the LISA V conference in 2006. The data from the previous study are revisited to determine how a wider institutional base and mergers affect comparisons between research units.

Making online resources more accessible to physically challenged library users is a topic deserving informed attention from astronomy librarians. Recommendations like WCAG 2.0 standards and section 508, in the United States, have proven valuable, and some vendors are already making their products compliant with them. But what about the wide variety of databases and other resources produced by astronomy information professionals themselves? Few, if any, of these are currently compliant with accessibility standards. Here we discuss some solutions to these accessibility challenges.