That 1976 study is by Hans Heinrich Schmid, Der sogenannte Jahwist: Beobachtungen und Fragen zur Pentateuchforschung (Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1976).
There is a similarly named, but likely quite different, article by Konrad Schmid that was translated into English by Anselm C. Hagedorn. That article is online here:
http://www.theologie.uzh.ch/faecher/alt ... st_PDF.pdf
Konrad Schmid's article seems to want to do away with the concept of a Yahwist source (or sources), but it also appears to have been based on theological grounds (J is interpreted by the classic DH as representing a salvation history presupposing the settlement of Canaan by the Hebrews, and in effect justifying it, which Schmid feels is wrong). Kill the messenger ...
The book in which this translation occurs, A Farewell to the Yahwist?: The Composition of the Pentateuch in Recent European Interpretation, edited by Thomas B. Dozeman & Konrad Schmid (SBL, 2006), seems to contain essays by a variety of writers, no all of whom reject an Yahwist source or sources. A downloadable PDF is here:
http://img2.timg.co.il/CommunaFiles/49106691.pdf
I am finding it very difficult to find reviews of the Hypothesis that are not flavored by apologetics. The wicki article you cited on the Yahwist source, at least in its present form, seems to have been done by an Evangelical seminary student. Notice the dependence on modern textbooks published by the likes of Hendrickson and Fortress Press.
However, an online SBL forum article is proving interesting and fleshes out what Rolf Rendtorff calls the Yahwist Crisis, caused by European scholars treating the Yahwist material as the product of a post-P final redactor in the 1970s and later:
"What Happened to the "Yahwist": Reflections after Thirty Years," SBL Forum, n.p. [cited June 2006].
http://sbl-site.org/Article.aspx?ArticleID=553
DCH
semiopen wrote: Jahwist -Julius Wellhausen, the 19th century German scholar responsible for the classical form of the documentary hypothesis, did not attempt to date J more precisely than the monarchical period of Israel's history.[9] In 1938 Gerhard von Rad placed J at the court of Solomon, c. 950 BCE, and argued that his purpose in writing was to provide a theological justification for the unified state created by Solomon's father, David.[10] This was generally accepted until a crucial 1976 study by H.H. Schmid, called in English "The So-called Yahwist", demonstrated that J knew the prophetic books of the 8th and 7th centuries BCE, while the prophets did not know the traditions of the Torah, meaning J could not be earlier than the 7th century.[11] A number of current theories place J even later, in the exilic and/or post-exilic period (6th–5th centuries BCE).[12]