Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UCL Human Rights 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   redirect to University College London.  MBisanz  talk 00:22, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

UCL Human Rights Review

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

non notable student journal, lacks 3rd party references Rtphokie (talk) 13:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of notability, sources etc. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 14:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.  Chzz  ►  15:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no notability, no sources. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Why does Wikipedia want to delete this? There does not appear to be any substantive justification for it. (Note: there are pages on Wikipedia that are much more deserving of deletion) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.56.196 (talk) 01:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)  — 92.236.56.196 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  00:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Student law reviews can be notable, but specialty ones like this, especially ones published only annually, are not, in the absences of specific evidence for it. This one has no holdings on WorldCat and does not even appear to have an ISSN, which is usually a minimum standard for any periodical. What's more they've only published one issue, & its hard to be notable at that point. Yes, we have pages on a few equally unnotable student journals, and they should go also. DGG (talk) 04:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  —94.196.126.123 (talk) 12:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  —94.196.126.123 (talk) 12:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge what little encyclopedic content there is to University College London. THF (talk) 14:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep But clean up this reads like an ad. I think this topic is too important to delete and we'll want to keep for information purposes when it shows up as a reliable source.  I think over time there will be good content.  jbolden1517Talk  05:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: notability of periodical yet to be established. No ISSN. Trivial coverage. JamesBurns (talk) 09:08, 12 March 2009 (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.