Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy Research & Social Science


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 11:59, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Energy Research & Social Science

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Relatively new journal (est. 2014). Not indexed in any database (according to its own website), not even in Elsevier's own Scopus. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Randykitty (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  12:31, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 09:36, 21 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak delete It doesn't seem to have a strong case towards journal notability now, though a quick Google Scholar search does show at least one article with over 200 cites and others with 50+ for being a pretty new journal. Once it is indexed by non-Google Scholar engines though (Scopus should have it soon from the looks of it), it shouldn't have issues being considered notable. It's not there yet though. I'd delete for now and wait for independent sources and indexing in what looks like the near future. Kingofaces43 (talk) 04:37, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete May pass WP:NJOURNALS one day, but that day is not today. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:38, 28 January 2016 (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.