Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Journal of MCH and AIDS


 * 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  05:54, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

International Journal of MCH and AIDS

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Randykitty (talk) 17:26, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment This is how I found the journal article. I removed references that did not even mention the journal as well as trivial indexing services, per WP:JWG. After that, not much was left... --Randykitty (talk) 17:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability (academic journals) is one of the more vague and confusing essays on notability. There is no indication that this is a predatory journal. I'd like to see what the page creator has to say about why this journal justifies an article. Also, does the publishing organization justify a page that this can be merged too? Legacypac (talk) 18:04, 1 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment. The publishing organization is as obscure as the journal itself. We don't have a single independent source on this journal, just some all-inclusive databases like DOAJ. And if you don't like NJournals (which was designed to make it easier for academic journals to cross the notability bar), I'm fine with looking at GNG, which is failed even more spectacularly... As for predatory journals, nobody ever said this was a predatory journal (and it or its publisher are not on Beall's now-defunct lists), but it is not enough for a journal to be "not predatory" to merit inclusion. Of course, we could try to do away with GNG or WP:N, but I don't think that proposal would gain much traction. The article creator is a SPA, their only edits are this article and an edit to a reference to this journal (which, I fear, would not meet WP:MEDRS either. --Randykitty (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions.  Every morning   (there's a halo...)  19:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 07:55, 2 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think this journal meets the Wikipedia's criteria for notability of academic journal, the journal is indexed in some notable journal indexing database such as PubMed Central and the Directory of open access journals. In DOAJ the journal has earned a green check which indicates that it has been reviewed and evaluated by independent auditors. I learned that DOAJ is not an all-indexing database, as they conduct an expert review of applicant journals to ensure that they meet their publishing guidelines. I have updated the page with more information referencing my data sources. — --Brownmagnus (talk) 23:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownmagnus (talk • contribs) 05:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)  — Brownmagnus (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment Any legit OA journal gets into DOAJ, so that is not a mark of notability. Any legit OA journal in the field of biomedical sciences gets into PubMed Central, so that is not a mark of notability either. As for the stuff that you added to the article: indexing in GScholar is trivial, as they index everything. Index Copernicus and CiteFactor are fake rating services. Two citations in books is pathetic, nothing less. Citations in Wikipedia articles are meaningless, anybody can add those (and, indeed, diligent journal editors often do so to increase the visibility of their journal). None of that stuff belongs in an article on a scientific journal. --Randykitty (talk) 09:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment After the addition of a lot of material to the article by (who, by the way, declares a COI on their user page), I just performed another cleanup (to explain to Brownmagnus the rationale behind each edit, I performed a series of small edits). For the sake of transparency, this is the cumulative edit. --Randykitty (talk) 10:13, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Randikitty, complete fail of WP:NJOURNALS/WP:GNG. The keep arguments above are meritless. This journal is literally indexed nowhere (save for DOAJ/PMC, which indexes everything OA/everything OA in medicine that isn't predatory [and even then they still include predatory stuff]), and with roughly 5 articles being cited more than 10 times through its life (now 6+ years), this journal made pretty much no/very little impact in medicine. Notability is more than just "is this journal predatory?". It's "did this journal make an demonstrable impact?" Could be a case WP:TOOSOON, but right now the answer to that second question is no, it did not. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I was unable to find multiple secondary in-depth sources about this journal, so it fails to meet WP:GNG notability guidelines. It's a real journal with no indications of being predatory and is indexed in DOAJ and Pubmed, but these are not selective enough to confer notability according to WP:NJournals. I also could not find it in the APA list of AIDS journals or Scimago list of infectious disease journals or other specialty lists. I don't see any good merge targets for the basic verifiable information we have about the journal. All of which unfortunately leads to a conclusion of delete. --Mark viking (talk) 11:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. As others have said, I'm not finding secondary in-depth coverage. The only databases mentioning it are more or less WP:INDISCRIMINATE and won't satisfy WP:GNG for journals. Kingofaces43 (talk) 23:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:55, 16 June 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.