Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMAJ


 * 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. Per Articles for deletion/Vedat Akman Black Kite (talk) 01:31, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

EMAJ

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Article PRODded with reason "New journal, no independent sources, not indexed in any major selective databases. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals", dePRODded without reason given, but with the addition of some non-selective indexes. hence, PROD reason still stands: Delete Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note See also the related AfDs for CINEJ and Vedat Akman. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Part of a walled garden of articles probably created by Vedat Akman himself. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:42, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete check this informations. --Alenbohcelyan (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC) — Alenbohcelyan (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

PKP: Inclusion verified: http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs-journals. Open Archives Registry: Inclusion verified: http://www.openarchives.org/Register/BrowseSites. UIUC OIA registry: Inclusion verified: http://gita.grainger.uiuc.edu/registry/searchform.asp. WorldCat (OCLC) OAIster: We registered our journal, but we’re working with OCLC to have the journals display in the results. Ulrich’s: http://ulrichsweb.serialssolutions.com/search/94665581 and http://ulrichsweb.serialssolutions.com/search/3116753. Have to request a correction to the record, though, because they incorrectly list the publisher, which should be University Library System, University of Pittsburgh. EBSCO: Verified. Have a signed agreement. http://old.library.georgetown.edu/newjour/: Verified. You can search for them online at that URL. Directory of Open Access Journals http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=suggest&owner=1: Submitted but the journals do not yet appear. Do know they have a back log but will look into this further. Electronic Journals Library: Previously submitted but have submitted them again. EBSCO databases already included. CABELLS-USA Submitted and under review. JournalsSeek Submitted and under review. ABI/INFORM-USA Submitted for review. Index Islamicus: submitted for review.
 * Don't Delete. It is recenly accepted to be listed in Cabell’s Directory as well.  --beykenthoca (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:12, 15 April 2012 (UTC).  — beykenthoca (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment on the two above !votes: even if the journal would be accepted by all the databases where it currently is under review, it still would not meet WP:NJournals: none of these databases is a major and selective one. Cabell's, DOAJ, Journalseek, OCLC, etc all basically try to be as inclusive as possible. This is all way too soon. Wait a few years until the journal has had time to establish itself. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Just a few more points EMAJ neither CINEJ are citiation index journals but they are peer-reviewed semiannual indexed journals published by a very reputable research university in USA and listed with indexes such as EBSCOHOST, CABELL'S Directory (recently accepted) which are well known indexes. These journals are part of OJS system which is the same concept wikipedia uses... Because they are free does not make them un-exclusive ??? I don't recall wikipedia listing about which is exclusive or major and selective ??? if there is such a list by Wikipedia please direct me too it so all scientific community can benefit from it. But you make it sound like your point is absolute like there is such a list with wikipedia that cleary states which indexes are so... Major and selective according to you or is there a list which clearly states EBSCOHOST or DOAJ or CABELLS and many others are not ??? Please dont make your opions sound so binding on all scientific community or wiki... --beykenthoca (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.248.168 (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Just to clarify more there is also a lot of criticism on those what you call exclusive indexes (mostly citation) because it has become a big business... that is why we chose to start and stay with OJS Open Journal System its free and available to all like wikipedia plus our journals are published with one of the leading research universities Pittsburgh University Library System (supporter of OJS)and Pittsburgh Press which we are very proud to work with--beykenthoca (talk)
 * Comment And also have any one looked at the Peer-review Board ??? I think that will tell a lot about the quality of the journals.--beykenthoca (talk)
 * Comment please consider some caveats to guidelines announced at proper wiki page on the topic which states " 1.Note that as this is a guideline and not a rule; exceptions may well exist. Some journals may not meet any of these criteria, but may still be notable for the work they have published. It is important to note that it is very difficult to make clear requirements in terms of quality of publications: The criteria, in practice, vary greatly by field... " Thank you. .--beykenthoca (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.248.168 (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment At this point, there is no evidence at all that any article published by EMAJ has made any impact at all. And some selective and widely accepted databases are the Social Sciences Citation Index (including many business and management journals) or Scopus. There are many more and using them to assess the notability of a journal is unconroversial among participants in the Wikiproject Academic Journals. Outside of that project, their use is not always accepted, but people that don't accept inclusion in the SSCI as indicating notability will not accept any indexing (and certainly not trivial ones like DOAJ) as evidence of notability. But if you can show that EMAJ meets WP:GNG, that would be sufficient, too (but in my experience, very few journals clear that bar). At this point, EMAJ clearly fails both NJournals and GNG and you have not provided any reason why this particular journal should be an exception to all that. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:09, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment As much as I know EMAJ collaborated with important organizations such as Institute for International Research (IIR), International Strategic Management Conference (ISMC) and International Conference on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management (ICLTIM) and received papers from them plus conference proceedings from these organizations were also published by Elsevier in its “Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences” publication, which is indexed by the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI) of Thomson Reuters as well. President of the Conference and some board members of ISMC are also with the editorial team of  EMAJ too. Well they are very active people in the scientific community. EMAJ team is really very solid and EMAJ deserves a chance…--beykenthoca (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 22:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC).
 * Comment Notability is not inherited, so regardless how notable and important the organizations that EMAJ collaborates with, that does not show that EMAJ itself is notable. Nobody wants to deny EMAJ a chance. If it is as good and important as you say, then it will soon be recognized as such by many higly-cited articles, good independent sources, inclusion in selective databases, etc. As soon as that happens, we can write an article about it here on WP. But just now, we need a crystal ball to see whether or not this new journal will succeed. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 22:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't Delete. look at Social Science Research Center Berlin link http://www.wzb.eu/en/library/collections-search/e-journals?page=detail.phtml&bibid=WZB&colors=3&lang=en&jour_id=179553 good articles get published there and get citation by others and it creates scientific productivity...I have an article published there as well. The success of journals like EMAJ also depends on our support and trust. Nothing in life is cystal and certainly I wish I had a crystal ball too. This journal is published by Pittsburgh University which is a highly recommended research university in USA. I think it has future --sitkisonmezer (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 08:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC).  — sitkisonmezer (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Don't Delete. http://www.prmia.org/events/view_events.php?eventID=4940 keynote speaker their proceedings will be published with EMAJ… look at  the speakers from IMF, Moodys Worldbank  --thezibidi  (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 18:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC).  — thezibidi (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Remark... I must say it here too, please look at the link on reliability at wiki which states "the publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press). All three can affect reliability. " so my point is Pittsburgh University or Pittsburgh University Press is reliable as well may be more... It is a highly ranked research university or do you have a different opinion about reliability because if Pittsburgh University is not than What ??? where is this discussion going just look at the wiki pages on related points it clearly states that there are exceptions to rules requests felixibility and commonsense and being reasonable... criticism is good but needs to be constructive also please. Thank you. --ozkazanci (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC) — ozkazanci (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * And I say it here, too: the PUP site confirms that the journal exists, which is not the same thing as conferring notability. Thanks. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Remark...Hi, I am asst. Prof. Sitki S. From Beykent University. I lost my password so I continued with this nickname previously it was sitkisonmezer. For the record,  sorry for any confusion.  I am writing this message from our Taksim Campus location we have 3 campuses. I reside in Ayazaga Campus usually... Unfortunately, I  find  wiki very difficult for first timers. I feel very uncomfortable... I thank you  for the opportunity to discuss the future of EMAJ and CINEJ which I both support but I think I should  complete my discussion on all pages because I really said all there is to say. Thank you. Best wishes. Sitki S.--ozkazanci (talk)
 * Delete per Guillaume, basically. The "Abstracting and indexing" section is a pretty blatant and unsuccessful attempt at academic plugging. Some of the entries are basically library holdings, and this--really, this is supposed to make it notable? Drmies (talk) 02:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Guillaume BO ; talk 17:28, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak delete as in my comment for CINEJ.  DGG ( talk ) 19:00, 18 April 2012 (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.