Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Confluence: The Journal of Graduate Liberal Studies


 * 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   no consensus. (non-admin closure) LlamaAl (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Confluence: The Journal of Graduate Liberal Studies

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article PRODded with reason "Moribund journal/magazine. No indication of notability, no independent sources (apart from library catalogs)." Was de-PRODded referring to a discussion on the article's talk page. However, that discussion does not provide any valid argument establishing notability for this publication. Does not meet WP:GNG or any other potentially applicable guideline. Hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 11:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. The journal is interdisciplinary and as such does not fit into a neat category as others do. The fact that it is included in LOC and WORLDCAT helps, and, as discussed on the previous talk page the journal was deemed borderline notable by consensus. Jimsteele9999 (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Being included in Worldcat or LOC does not contribute anything to notability. And the way I read that talk page, I don't see any consensus about even borderline notability. Apart from yourself, everybody at that page seems to argue for lack of notability. But let's see what the rest of the community thinks. --Randykitty (talk) 12:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Dubious Existence is not notability; The journal site gives no information about indexes, and neither does the worldcat entry. so I need to check. However the New York Public library reports it as caving ceased with v.16 2011; their web site shows the dates is at v.16 2010. The site however refers to a 2012 issue. I suppose, like many small journals, they're irregular.  DGG ( talk ) 20:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 18:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C ) 00:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 10:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 10:06, 8 February 2013 (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.