Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EUROMICRO (2nd nomination)


 * 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. slakr \ talk / 06:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

EUROMICRO
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

AfD was closed because in 2 weeks as no consensus it had attracted only one comment. Does not appear to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been nominated for deletion twice before (speedy and prod) by two different editors, but considered not to meet that criteria/possibly be notable. It has been tagged for notability for over six years without resolution. It would be good if this time there were more responses or it is relisted enough times to get a response - as this has been tagged for notability for more than 6 years, it is time it was resolved. Boleyn (talk) 20:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Notable. A publication of Euromicro, the Journal of Systems Architecture, has an ISI impact factor and therefore satisfies criteria 1 of WP:NJournals. I also found this. Its other publications also seem to be widely cited. The lack of response to the last AfD may indicate a "silent consensus" that Euromicro is notable. James500 (talk) 12:39, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree with nom. A journal is affiliated to Euromicro, so what? NN. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 07:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * But it is not just any journal, it is a notable journal. James500 (talk) 11:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete&mdash;This is a significant organization, but I don't see a path to establishing that it's a notable one. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 16:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If the journal is notable (and, unless I am mistaken, WP:NJournals seems to say that this one is) the organisation that produced it is automatically notable. We have always accepted that people can inherit notability from their publications. Putting the journal and the organisation that produced it into one article is how we normally handle borderline cases. Or at least it was in April of last year when I last discussed this. James500 (talk) 11:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi James500. I see you created Notability (publishing).  Can you give me a pointer to where this was discussed?  Thanks!  Lesser Cartographies (talk) 11:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That is just an essay that expresses what I think is an obvious application of GNG and LISTN. But IIRC, North Louisiana Historical Association was kept at AfD largely on the strength of NJournals. James500 (talk) 12:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC) Strike that, looking back at the AfD, it was an argument advanced by a number of veteran editors. James500 (talk) 12:22, 17 September 2014 (UTC) Update: The essay is now a draft proposal. James500 (talk) 21:25, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. James500 (talk) 01:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

SBaker43 (talk) 07:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC) 
 * Keep. Publication through Elsevier and IEEE argue strongly for both standards of WP:NONPROFIT.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 11:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree SBaker43's argument. A journal of the organization is in sciencedirect .  They hold international conferences and the proceedings are cited in many independent sources.  Definitely meets the two criteria in WP:NONPROFIT. I am One of Many (talk) 07:03, 30 September 2014 (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.