Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Asian Review
Appearance
- 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 keep. Withdrawn by nom and no "delete" !votes. Randykitty (talk) 11:58, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Central Asian Review (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article dePRODded without reason given after addition of some references that fail to meet GNG. Therefore PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 11:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Withdrawn given the sources found by Steve Quinn. Will close this in a moment. --Randykitty (talk) 11:57, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 11:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I just noticed that while there was no edit summary the dePRODding editor left an explanation on the article's talk page. I note that the "Bibliography of Asian Studies", while thematical selective, is not selective in the sense of NJournals. --Randykitty (talk) 11:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. The Bibliography of Asian Studies is selective not only thematically but, importantly, in the sense of being selected by the top professional academic body in the field, the Association for Asian Studies. The journal closed long before any of the current indices were established. Randykitty's assertion of another definition of selectivity has no basis in NJournals. This page is useful and encyclopaedic, even if it needs further work. Sheijiashaojun (talk) 19:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I've given my rationale and given Sheijiashaojun's behavior in a related AfD I will not comment here further. --Randykitty (talk) 19:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment It wasn't the case when it was nominated that it had no independent sources, but I have also added a further one. Sheijiashaojun (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions Sheijiashaojun (talk) 01:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uzbekistan-related deletion discussions Sheijiashaojun (talk) 01:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Central Asia-related deletion discussions Sheijiashaojun (talk) 01:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Keep I have discovered some independent sourcing that covers this topic in-depth, therefore I must ivote keep::
- I also discovered the first reference in the Wikipedia article on JSTOR:
- So this satisfies GNG and NJOURNALS. Anybody with access to JSTOR can read these articles. As an aside, I could not find the quote cited by the second reference so that quote probably has to be removed.
- I have discovered another one:
- ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
I didn't put the link in the article, but the reference is I think to the right page. I'll correct the typo now too. Sheijiashaojun (talk) 04:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Off-topic
|
---|
|
- Please add additional comments and ivotes below. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 20:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: based on my own search and sources provided by Steve there seems to be sufficient coverage in the form of review articles in other journals Eddie891 Talk Work 11:40, 22 August 2021 (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.