Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TRIVIA: Voices of Feminism


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:03, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

TRIVIA: Voices of Feminism

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This journal does not appear to meet WP:NJOURNALS. Searching its ISSN on Social Sciences Citation Index and Scopus does not turn up any results. As far as I can tell, it is not influential or widely cited enough to meet criteria 2 and 3 of WP:JOURNALCRIT. However, I am not too familiar with the notability standards for academic journals, so I welcome input from other editors. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 05:08, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 05:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:23, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:23, 15 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete: Since both NJOURNALS and JOURNALCRIT are essays, whether the subject meets them or not isn't particularly relevant. I see no sign that the subject meets the GNG, however, and as a resident of the town in which this one is published (and working for an organization publishing similar periodicals), never having heard of the subject causes me to wonder.  Of the two sources in the article that aren't primary, one is a press release (and one, furthermore, nearly two decades old, and actually surfing to the source reveals that it's the webpage of one of TRIVIA's editors) and the other listing only the publication's name, that it is in the "newspapers" category, and the names of four ex-editors. Beyond that, a glance at the contribution history of the article creator  turns up quite a few similar articles, many on obscure, ephemeral feminist publications, lacking any notion of substantive coverage, and often with fannish peacock language.  None of the half dozen such articles I looked at could survive AfD, I wager, and several more of the editor's article creations have been moved to draftspace for lack of sourcing.   Ravenswing      07:19, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Essentially a promotional article for a website, claims of notability are not supported by independent sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's a magazine and not really a peer-reviewed academic journal, so NJournals does not apply. Criteria for magazines are even weaker than for journals, so GNG applies, which as Ravenswing explains eloquently, is not met in this case. The other articles mentioned should perhaps be PRODed. --Randykitty (talk) 12:25, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite right, I'm not sure what gave me the impression this was an academic journal. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Not enough citations provided. Peter303x (talk) 20:03, 17 May 2021 (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.