Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional article on likely predatory journal. Journal established in 2015, not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Journal claims an impact factor, but 1/ having been established only last year, an IF cannot yet be calculated and 2/ the journal is not indexed by Thomson Reuters. In fact, the IFs claimed (there are actual several...) are from bogus "indexing" outfits that provide a meaningless "impact factor" to whomever pays. I originally tagged this as G11 (spam) and still think that applies, but the tag was removed by a newbie editor without further explanation. In any case, whether promotional or not, or whether predatory or not is not really the issue here. What is the issue is that there is not a shred of notability. The article meets neither WP:GNG nor WP:NJournals. Hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 16:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's on Beall's list so it's almost certainly a predatory journal, which we should not be in the business of promoting or lending legitimacy to. Joe Roe (talk) 17:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of any notability (or even a good grasp of English). No independent references at all . Fails WP:GNG.  Velella  Velella Talk 19:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nominator. Clearly fails WP:NJournals, WP:PROMO, WP:OR, and WP:42.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- WP:PROMO on a predatory journal. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2016 (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.