Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The International Scope 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   Delete. Not notable. Malinaccier (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The International Scope Review

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

article is unsourced and notability has not been established. Appears to be a "walled garden" with Patrick Hunout and The Social Capital Foundation, all three unsourced and each attempting to prop up the others. Madagascar periwinkle (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. According to the journal's website, the last issue appeared in 2008, so it seems to be moribund. That is in itself, of course, not a reason to delete, because a defunct journal may still have a notable history. However, according to the Web of Knowledge, only 9 articles published by the "INT SCOPE REV" have ever been cited (7 cited 1 time, 2 cited 2 times). This clearly indicates that this journal never made much or even any impact. --Crusio (talk) 11:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Listed at WikiProject Academic Journals/Deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Totally non-notable. That a few citations to it are listed in WOS does not in fact mean it is one of the ones they index, just that other journals have been known to refer to it. they include every paper an included journal cites without checking further.  Ulrich's does not even include it. Not even the Library of Congress has it, not even the British library. DGG (talk) 04:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm willing to be lenient on the need for reliable third-party sources for academic journals, if those journals appear frequently in the bibliographies of other articles here, on the basis that it's helpful to have an article about the journal to help verifiability of those other articles that cite it. But that doesn't seem to be the case here: the only mention of this journal on WP that I can find, outside the walled garden identified by the nominator, are in the articles on two others of its editorial board members, Pierre Bourdieu and Ronald Inglehart, both of whom are certainly notable but for whose notability this journal is peripheral. Neither Bourdieu nor Inglehart has ever published in TISR; Bourdieu is no longer alive (but is still listed by TISR as an editorial board member), and Inglehart has no mention of TISR on his web page. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * delete per Crusio, DGG. Pete.Hurd (talk) 04:00, 12 June 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.