Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gurdjieff 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   no consensus. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 07:19, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

The Gurdjieff Journal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable publication, I've looked for outside sources and they are far and few between. WP:GNG. Ducknish (talk) 20:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  ///Euro Car  GT  23:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Considering the WP:ATD, there is no argument for deletion here, because the topic is already covered at William Patrick Patterson.  At one point in time, it was redirected there.  With all of the WP:IINFO in the current article, I recommend a speedy keep and a bold redirect.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:40, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The WP:IINFO has been removed, so I am striking my comment that mentions it. Unscintillating (talk) 00:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I would argue that WP:ATD doesn't really supersede notability in this case, and I would ask your opinion of the notability of this topic before we start throwing "speedy keep" around. Just because it gets a mention in a separate article doesn't make it a notable topic in itself. Ducknish (talk) 02:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect to William Patrick Patterson George Gurdjieff, not the least evidence of notability. The way I interpret Unscintillating's comment (but correct me if I am wrong), they are not arguing for actually keeping this article, but for redirecting it. --Randykitty (talk) 07:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

As a frequent user, but new to making comments, I apologize in advance for any improperly structured commentary.
 * Propose updating and keeping.

I do propose keeping the entry as its own article. While William Patrick Patterson is the editor of The Gurdjieff Journal (TGJ), TGJ owes its look to Henry Korman, a published author in his own right, and owner of the graphic design firm Wordplay Consulting. His wife, Mary Ellen Korman, also a published author, is a regular contributor to TGJ. Other contributors include Don Hoyt, former President of the Gurdjieff Foundation; Joyce Collin-Smith, a published author; and James Moore (who has his own Wikipedia entry), a published author.

TGJ published its first issue in 1992--22 years ago. It accepts no advertising so its editorial will not be influenced by commercial considerations. Its support has come from subscribers and newsstand sales. Its focus has been devoted solely to G. I. Gurdjieff, considered by many as the seminal esoteric spiritual figure of the last century, and The Fourth Way teaching he brought of harmonious self-development. It delivers a unique viewpoint on the culture of our day in terms of book and film reviews and cultural commentary, while exploring the many facets of the teaching through original research. Thus TGJ stands as an entity in its own right, not simply as an extension of Mr. Patterson.

I would propose removing the paragraph on TGJ from the William Patrick Patterson entry, simply noting that he is the editor.

Having read the topic on "notability," I recognize that the stated terms are a challenge for a specialty publication in a relatively small universe of similar periodicals. There are five periodicals that I am aware of that are Fourth Way oriented: Parabola, Gurdjieff International Review, Stopinder, Material For Thought, and TGJ. Stopinder and Material for Thought are no longer published, as of 2004 and 1984 respectively. Parabola is currently the only one of these that has its own Wikipedia entry.

In looking at the Parabola entry, as well as Ducknish's entry "The Northern Standard", it does seem that the internal footnoting is relatively modest. In Googling both these entries, I see that a number of external references, particularly for Parabola, are listings on websites for periodicals and books such as jacketflap, to which TGJ can easily be added. There are also print-only references, which will require some research to properly source.

The TGJ entry did contain a list of issue themes, just as Parabola does, as well as a list of some article titles. It is noted that Randykitty removed the listing of article titles, saying "WP is not for posting tables of contents." However, the issues themes list was also removed. I propose restoring the issues themes list, particularly as it denotes the significant themes addressed in TGJ, and reflects similar information used in the Parabola article.

In short, I propose:

1) Expanding the entry to include other significant contributors

2) Actively adding TGJ to a number of the websites that track periodicals, and including print-only references.

3) Expanding on the history and editorial philosophy of TGJ

4) Restoring the discussion of themes covered by the issues (but not the articles listing).

5) Restructuring the article to align with other periodical discussions such as that for Parabola

The work to address this can begin immediately. Will this address the concerns raised?

--xmarc999 (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2014 (UTC) — xmarc999 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Agree with Propose updating and keeping.

xmarc999 makes good points. I can start making those changes now.

Waterman12 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC) 
 * Comment For tips on writing, see out magazine and journal article writing guides. The most pressing issue here is to show notability, either through meeting WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Without that you can edit all you want, but the article will then be deleted in any case. --Randykitty (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

 Response to Randykitty First, thank you for directly responding to what has been said, rather than talking around me or around the content of the proposal. I understand the need for "notability," through frankly am struggling a bit with this. Ducknish states that "I've looked for outside sources and they are far and few between", yet when I click on the link at the top of this discussion page, I see a slew of references to TGJ; I stopped counting at 140. Even taking away self-referential links, including TGJ and GurdjieffLegacy.org, I still end up with 40+. Nevertheless, I am gathering additional sourcing, as I have discovered a book and a website that have reprinted TGJ articles, as well as two books that have started out as articles in TGJ. Am I going in the right direction? And yes, I am trying to get through the the various articles you have directly and indirectly pointed me to. Thank you again. Xmarc999 (talk) 03:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)xmarc999
 * Redirect to George Gurdjieff per lack of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Response Since George Gurdjieff did not start The Gurdjieff Journal, a redirect to him would seem misleading. Attempting to address sources as noted above. Xmarc999 (talk)xmarc999
 * It doesn't matter who started it. The magazine isn't independently notable and it is "a triannual magazine devoted exclusively to George Gurdjieff's teaching of the Fourth Way." SO that can be noted in his article. Candleabracadabra (talk) 05:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Note of previously undeclared conflicts of interest - In this edit, xmarc999 admits to "providing editing support" to The Gurdjieff Journal, and that Waterman12 "provides web support for the Gurdjieff Journal website". In addition, xmarc999 was brought to this AfD discussion by Waterman12 who wanted support in this discussion, and they collaborated via email prior to their !votes. --  At am a  頭 19:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Response I suspect that the core material for say, The New York Times and Parabola, is provided by staffers, so not sure why "admitting" to this is a negative. My second post on this topic (in response to the sockmonkey accusation) fully disclosed my position, and I updated my talk page with my background, (please read the referenced link for yourself), so not sure why this is characterized as "previously undeclared". As the subject matter expert on The Gurdjieff Journal, I ask Waterman12 to refrain from further participation as this is taken as "collaboration". Is there any chance, with the noted exception of Randykitty (Thx), of any editors actually responding to the content of my proposals, without accusing me of being a sockpuppet or collaborator? I am still specifically requesting guidance. If someone tells me "come back in a month when you have addressed x, y, and z", OK. Is there a better page to open this type of discussion?" Xmarc999 (talk) 03:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)xmarc999
 * You're starting to go in the right direction, but we're not there yet. Which link at the top of the page do you mean (there are several)? Google may lead you to sources that discuss the magazine in more detail and that could potentially show notability. Generally, 2 sources would be enough if they are "in-depth". Google Scholar will show you how many other journals have cited work published in this journal. For those, a couple of hundred will not be enough, I fear. In AfDs about individual scholars, we generally require something in the order of a thousand citations in order for them to be judged notable. A whole journal that has been in existence for more than 20 years will need significantly more. Is the journal indexed in any scholarly databases? --Randykitty (talk) 10:14, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * "Which link ... do you mean?" At the top, where it says "Find sources:", followed by the hyperlink for "The Gurdjieff Journal".
 * I would think that, say, scientific journals may well have hundreds or thousands of references, and are likely indexed in scholarly databases. But I note that TGJ is closer to a cross between magazines found in the Category:Magazines About Spirituality and Analytic journalism, (though the latter is not a "category"). The closest peer would be Parabola (magazine), with some similarities to Sacred Hoop Magazine. At one point I found a list of articles edited by one of the other commenting editors (not sure now how I did that) on newspapers. Many of the references to these newspapers appeared to be in sites such as worldcat.org (in which TGJ is already listed), and a number of other similar sites in which, with some effort, TGJ could be listed (and should be listed. I have now started to contact a number of those sites with the necessary information). I am currently going through the categories of Magazines About Spirituality and Religious Magazines, as well as articles on newspapers with targeted audiences (i.e. Ukranians in Sydney) to understand their sources. Xmarc999 (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)xmarc999
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 05:16, 1 May 2014 (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.