Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historia (PUC Chile 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ya sh ! 20:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historia (PUC Chile journal)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article creator/maintainer has inadequate understanding of journal notability guidelines (WP:NJournals); attempts to request proof of notability were rejected with simplistic arguments: "its a major journal where many notable authors have published their works". fgnievinski (talk) 13:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 13:50, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see a rather vague rationale (not comply with WP:NJournals? How does it not comply?) with no specific point. Other than this the nomination is mostly an ad hominem commentary. Dentren | ^Talk 16:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It does not comply in any way -- unclear abstracting and indexing status, to start with. Notability requires verifiable evidence. Please quote from WP:NJournals#Notes and examples to demonstrate how exactly the present nominee is notable. If the the burden of proof cannot be satisfied, I suggest the journal be described in a section of the article about the publisher and a redirect be put in place. fgnievinski (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fgnievinski is wasting his, and mine, time here. The article complies with the three basic points of WP:NJournals: it is considered influential as its inclusion in the site Memoria Chilena (published by the National Library of Chile) attests.[1]. Second it is frequently cited [2]. It has historical purpose as sources in the article state within he journal figures like Jaime Eyzaguirre, Armando de Ramón(Chilean National History Award), Gonzalo Vial(Minister of Education), Gabriel Guarda(Chilean National History Award) and Ricardo Krebs(Chilean National History Award) converged. I don't understand the nomination as I it confusing to see its relation to Fgnievinski two attempts to move the page name on dubious grounds details here. Dentren | ^Talk 19:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, it would seriously astonish me if a 50+ years old Chilean journal of history, founded by one of the most important Chilean historians, published in Chile by one of the top universities in all of Latin America, was not considered 'influential' in its field. I'm not saying it's impossible, but given I don't speak a lick of Spanish, I can't say I would support deletion at this time. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:07, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Indexed in Arts & Humanities Citation Index, so it meets WP:NJournals (I only checked the Thomson Reuters journal list, so there may be more). Article has problems and should be improved according to our writing guide, but that is not for AfD. --Randykitty (talk) 19:29, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's also in Scopus, as "Historia (Chile)" with print ISSN 0073-2435 (MIAR -see Headbomb below- uses the same ISSN). --Randykitty (talk) 17:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It escalated to a deletion nomination because previous attempts at tagging the article for notability were removed with not proof or sourcing: [3] fgnievinski (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep kinda forgot about this one, but according to MIAR it's indexed in several high quality/selective databases. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NJournals; this is indexed in selective databases. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 16:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.