Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Management & Social Sciences


 * 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. WP:NPASR. KTC (talk) 10:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Journal of Management & Social Sciences

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Journal not listed in any selective databases. Article has no independent sources. A search (thanks to Neelix gives some hits on Google News and Google Books. However, none of this is more than an in-passing mention and not sufficient coverage to establish notability for the journal. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 08:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Pakistan is not a locus of notable academic journals and this thing has no web or academic prescence.  TCO (talk) 06:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 00:12, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 07:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep-an article to expand. The topic seems notable.--Knight of Infinity (talk) 01:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment As the nom says, sources are thin. I could find no in-depth independent sources for general notability. With respect to databases, JMSS is in DOAJ, DOAJ claims to be selective and DOAJ is notable itself. I'll leave it to the experts to determine if DOAJ is selective enough for JMSS to pass WP:NJournals. --Mark viking (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2013 (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.