Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Management & Social Sciences (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 delete. I JethroBT drop me a line 06:07, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Journal of Management & Social Sciences
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Has been at AfD before, which was closed as no consensus after several relistings and hardly any participation in the discussion. No new sources have been forthcoming. In fact, the journal seems to have disappeared since then. Still does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Randykitty (talk) 20:48, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete, not notable. I know there was "no consensus" before, but it has no RS citing and does not convey any real information; a very minor stub. When looking at the "view history" section, it does not show any meaningful work in years, as far as improvement of information or improvement in relation to being a notable subject for an article. Kierzek (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. The first AfD included an argument that DOAJ is selective but I don't buy that: it is selective merely in the fact that it has some definition of "open access" that listed journals must obey, and that's not good enough. No other sign of notability is evident, per WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I found the journal on the web here: . The DOAJ is not a selective index as pertains to WP:NJOURNALS. Whoever Ivoted that it is selective before didn't understand selective according to standards set by Wikipedia and NJOURNALS. Hence, not listed in any selective data bases and no impact factor. Also, this journal apparently ceased publication in 2013 - according to its webpage (see link). So, it has no historical value either.Steve Quinn (talk) 01:00, 29 July 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.