Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Media 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.  Sandstein  06:46, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Global Media Journal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD was removed by author. Rationale for deletion: Likely predatory journal: website promotes "Research Gate impact factor", a paltry Google Scholar 5-year h-index of 7, indexing in databases that are either fake (e.g., Index Copernicus) or trivial (e.g., OCLC), claims indexing in Scopus (but was in fact delisted in 2016 when Scopus removed a large number of predatory journals), weird page for editorial board with disfigured photographs, ungrammatical English, and more signs of not being a legitimate academic publication (see Think Check Submit). Article lists a smattering of in-passing mentions in some newspapers, but no in-depth coverage necessary to meet WP:GNG. Does not meet WP:NJOurnals or GNG. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:10, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as original PRODder. Very low quality journal at best, but that is irrelevant when discussing notability. What is relevant is that there are no in-depth sources satisfying GNG and that there is nothing that comes even close to satisfying NJournals. Most telling is perhaps that the journal itself proudly announces that articles in it have been cited 11 times by other academic journals. That's right: 11 times. Anybody who thinks that is impressive should not be in academic publishing. --Randykitty (talk) 09:17, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm the author of this article.  Article needs improvement but subject is notable even for a stub article.  If you do a search on Wikipedia for this journal's name you will find it cited many, many times.  More references needed but it seems notable enough for a Wikipedia article in my opinion. Neptune&#39;s Trident (talk) 16:55, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If this journal has been cited many, many times on Wikipedia then we need to take a close look at those citations, because this does not seem to be a reliable journal. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Whatever the outcome of ths AfD, this is definitely not a reliable source. --Randykitty (talk) 17:48, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It's been cited about 40 times (see WP:JCW/G12). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:39, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, AFAICT, utter fail of WP:NJOURNALS. says its indexed in a few places, but I'm not sure any of those are selective.  would know. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:30, 18 May 2018 (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.