Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Australian Journal of Physiotherapy


 * 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   Bold keep, while the article still needs to be improved, notability has clearly been established. Will tag for improvement. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 14:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The Australian Journal of Physiotherapy

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete medical journals are not inherently notable and this unsourced one-line article makes no assertion of notability. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a legitimate peer-reviewed medical journal that is listed in the PubMed database. The stub was just created a day or two ago, let's give it some time to flesh out. --Elonka 21:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Listed at WikiProject Academic Journals/Deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Elonka. II  | (t - c) 01:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Elonka. Edward321 (talk) 04:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Official Journal of the Australian Physiotherapy Association, been published for more than five decades, free access to all but the most recent four issues.  Print edition has a circulation of 12,000 copies.  Second in the world among general physiotherapy journals.  Listed in 15 indices around the world.  This one is perfectly obvious to anyone who has access to Google.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, no assertion of notability is not a valid reason for deletion. Journal is quite clearly notable as noted by users above.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:42, 11 July 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.