Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cadmus (Journal)


 * 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   delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Cadmus (Journal)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Relatively new journal that has not (yet?) had time to become notable. No independent sources, not included in any selective major databases. Does not meet WP:GNG. Guillaume2303 (talk) 02:49, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete no reason to think notable. The sponsorship of the journal seems a good indication to confirm that.   DGG ( talk ) 05:24, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 09:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The journal clearly has ambitions but no independent 3rd party references are yet visible so an article is at best premature. AllyD (talk) 21:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: I found no significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2011 (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.