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 Economic History of Developing Regions. — The Earwig (talk) 05:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Economic History Society of Southern Africa[edit]

Economic History Society of Southern Africa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Taking this to AfD after 12 years in CAT:NN. It exists, it has a small amount of coverage/citations, but what evidence is there that it is notable? Or a suitable merge/redirect target? Boleyn (talk) 22:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Goldsztajn (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I have found a couple of passing mentions which of course don't satisfy WP:ORGCRIT. It's a pity, the organization has a long history, but it fails notability guidelines for now. Less Unless (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not in-depth coverage to satisfy WP:ORGCRIT. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 19:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is an academic society and publisher of an academic journal, ORGCRIT is not the appropriate criteria to judge notability here. First and foremost, consensus is that academia is generally the one exception to notability as established through the GNG (ie WP:NPROF). Second, as publisher of the journal Economic History of Developing Regions there are ways in which specific relevant criteria can be used (WP:NJOURNALS): it is indexed in SJR and ranked 92 out of 253 in development studies journals and 424 out of 1160 economics studies journals; the journal ranks higher on the development studies list than, for example, Central Asian Survey and Journal of Human Development and Capabilities. However, my recommendation would be that the page be renamed with the title of the journal and the content be merged to the new page (and redirects created from the journal's original name and this page). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect Changing !vote in accordance with three other editors indicating support for redirection.--Goldsztajn (talk) 21:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Courtesy pings to Ravenswing and Kvng who last year PROD-ed and de-PROD-ed, respectively. --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Most of these many specialized and geographically localized societies are, unfortunately, not notable by Wikipedia's standards, and this one appears to be no exception: with no sourcing beyond a passing mention in the article's one footnote, we have no basis for writing a verifiable article that covers the topic in any depth. I tried searching but didn't find anything better. Additionally, although I believe this one is legitimate, without independent sourcing we have no basis for distinguishing legitimate societies of this type from the scammy and spammy ones made up by a small circle of academics to boost their curricula vitarum or fill their pockets with membership revenue. The argument above from NPROF and NJOURNALS doesn't convince me: first, societies are not professors, and most of the NPROF criteria involve verifiable recognition by other scholars or institutions. Some national-level scholarly societies do at least have a level of external recognition, as their country's representative society to a notable international umbrella organization, but we don't have evidence of that here. And second, NJOURNALS is an essay, not even accepted at the level of a guideline, describing specific forms of recognition that might be available to a journal, none of which seem to be met by this society or its journal. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Obviously I felt that the subject hadn't met notability standards last year, and further than twelve years in, no one gave a damn about improving it to the level that it might. While thanking Goldsztajn for his courtesy in pinging me, I disagree on both his main points. First off, NPROF is very specific in providing alternatives to the GNG to academics, it doesn't at all cover institutions or organizations. Secondly, while one of its publications might prove notable, WP:NOTINHERITED of course debars notability by association. That being said, should that be the case, I've no objection to a merger and redirect. Ravenswing 07:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to the article on the (notable) journal, Economic History of Developing Regions, which I just created. The only interesting tidbit of info from the stub article being discussed here (the founding year), has been included. --Randykitty (talk) 10:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Economic History of Developing Regions as preferred WP:ATD. ~Kvng (talk) 14:11, 19 April 2021 (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.