Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biomedical Research


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:22, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Biomedical Research

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Possibly-predatory journal from a possibly-predatory publisher (at least, Beall considers Allied Academies predatory) of questionable notability. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: The article was created by an account blocked as a sockpuppet of a banned user, so there may also be spam problems here. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 12:47, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 12:47, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, as its indexed in selective databases and service (JCR, Scopus, however those need to be confirmed via WP:IS since Allied Academics likes to fudge things like these to look better) and meets WP:NJOURNALS. The journal has a longer history than at Allied Academics, having been published by Andrew John Publishing before being acquired by Allied Academies/OMICS, and from some other outlet before AJP. This is a case where Allied Academics acquired an existing notable journal in ~2016 when they purchased the Pulsus Group. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:11, 5 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reluctantly. This is on its way to becoming non-notable, but notability is not temporary, so there we are. The journal currently still has an impact factor, because it was listed in the Science Citation Index Expanded. The 2016 IF will be its last one, though, as Clarivate has dropped the journal from coverage. For the moment it is also still in Scopus, so as Headbomb writes above, this meets NJournals. --Randykitty (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.