Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SLOVO Academic 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 keep. Bearian (talk) 22:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

SLOVO Academic Journal

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete non-notable publication with no reliable sources. Mayalld (talk) 18:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Among the missing content initiatives is one to create content for all peer reviewed academic journals. This claims to meet that requirement.  I'll look around on this one, but it shouldn't be an open-shut case. matt91486 (talk) 20:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment - the journal is also produced by a very high profile department, which also should be factored in. matt91486 (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment I'm not exactly sure why you want to delete this page. Can you please explain? Or give suggestions as to how it can be improved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darothster (talk • contribs) 12:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This field isnt covered by JCR, so it is relatively harder to judge the importance of the journal. But the journal is included in Ulrich's, the standard RS. Its been published since 1988. Its articles are covered by some of the major relevant disciplinary indexes: MLA Bibliography, Sociological Abs, Int. Bib. Social Sci, RILM, CSA Political Science Abstracts, and Wilson Humanities Index. The articles are included after the usual 12 month delay in Ebsco's collections. Meets the requirements. I do not think ''all' peer reviewed journals are notable--but an established one in the major indexes is. DGG (talk) 18:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - This journal is highly regarded within the field of slavonic studies; it is similar to many other journals currently featured on wikipedia and should not be deleted simply because it caters to specialized research interests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.92.57.11 (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per DGG -- for journals, inclusion in the major indexes is the best way of determining notability. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:41, 30 January 2008 (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.