Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Oregon Ornithology


 * 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal of Oregon Ornithology

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I recently PRODded this article, but that was denied by because there exists a previous AfD. I had seen that, but didn't think it applied as it was about a redirect (JOO). As Explicit explained on their talk page, that AfD was kind of messy, with page moves and change of focus during the discussion. In the end, I agree that it is better to take this to AfD. The PROD reason still stands: "Non-notable journal. No independent sources, not indexed anywhere. Homepage was last updated 10 years ago, so likely moribund. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals." Hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 16:30, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:58, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:59, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 17:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails WP:NJOURNALS. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Firstly, I note that WP:NJOURNALS is an essay, not a policy. I do note that, according to Worldcat, the journal is held by 44 libraries - not many, but they include libraries in Australia, South Africa, the Netherlands, Spain, etc, which for a journal dedicated to birds of one US state, suggests that it is held in some regard. Still checking for any sources - will return to !vote. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:09, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment You are free to ignore NJournals of course, but I'd like to note that NJournals was designed to make it easier for academic journals to be included in WP, as it is extremely rare that such a journal meets GNG. This one misses both by a mile and 44 libraries is paltry, especially for a journal that is available for free online. (So it doesn't cost anything to libraries to list it). --Randykitty (talk) 10:31, 31 July 2019 (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.