Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McGill Science Undergraduate Research 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. Jayjg (talk) 04:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

McGill Science Undergraduate Research Journal

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Undergraduate annual science journal that was established 4 years ago at McGill and has published 4 issues. The only indications for notability are the claim that it is one of the first undergraduate science journals in North America and that it was named "publication of the year" by McGill's Student Society. Apparently not indexed anywhere. Does not meet WP:Notability (academic journals) or WP:N. Crusio (talk) 13:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.  -- Crusio (talk) 13:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  -- Crusio (talk) 13:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- Crusio (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Purely undergraduate research collections of this sort spring up from time to time at most sufficiently sizeable institutions. Like most short-lived student publications, they have no notability worth speaking of. Ray  Talk 21:23, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think many universities have these. Most don't pass Notability (academic journals). I see no sign that this one is an exception. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:04, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. Not indexed anywhere, does not meet Notability (academic journals), and does not meet WP:N either. Nsk92 (talk) 00:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Science Undergraduate Society of McGill University. Why delete when you have a much better alternative. It would make an excellent expansion of the existing section. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The journal warrants at most 1-2 sentences in the target article you suggest, and a formal merge is not necessary in such a case. On the other hand, a merge and redirect option has an obvious drawback: it is far too easy to undo it and then we'd be back here again. A plain delete is preferable in this case. Nsk92 (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2010 (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.