Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Wildlife


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn. Joe Chill (talk) 19:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

British Wildlife

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I can't find significant coverage for this magazine. Joe Chill (talk) 16:59, 22 December 2009 (UTC) *Merge & redirect to List of wildlife magazines NtheP (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  18:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Change to Keep on basis of use as a academic source as per John Vandenberg. NtheP (talk) 16:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I have just added it to the list, but the list is a list with minimal content. This article is a stub, not merely a list item.  It is not an academic journal, but has been published for 20 years and is substantive enough to think itself worth indexing.  Peterkingiron (talk) 21:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable periodical in its field. Often articles are highly cited.  See also news related to the publisher. John Vandenberg (chat) 13:41, 23 December 2009 (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.