Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santa Clara Review


 * 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.  So Why  19:02, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Santa Clara Review

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I found no significant coverage. It could potentially be notable though due to its age, but I found no proof of notability. SL93 (talk) 19:42, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  16:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  16:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, reluctantly. I would think its age should make it notable but all I can find is entries in Writers Market and blurbs about writers who published there. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:09, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  07:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  15:07, 22 July 2017 (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.