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. Secret ^account 03:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

International Journal of Forest, Soil and Erosion

[edit]

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

Rather new journal. No independent sources, not indexed in any selective database. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Randykitty (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. It's taken me a while to get there, but I now agree that, at present, this journal does not meet the notability criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. I would encourage interested editors to check again in a year or two to see if there are any changes in this regard. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. New publication, founded in 2011. According to International Union of Soil Science, it's an open-access journal, contrary to assertions of peer review. Not indexed in any mainstream databases yet. I don't see indications that it's notable per Wikipedia criteria (WP:Notability, etc.). --Orlady (talk) 05:49, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not notable, appears to be self-published by the journal's editor. Hairhorn (talk) 14:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Two notes on the above: i) 'Open access' does not connote lack of peer-review; rather it means that the journal available to readers without a subscription fee. This journal does appear to be peer-reviewed. ii) Self-published seems somewhat relative, too; the journal is apparently not sponsored by an institution or organization, nor published by a publishing house; it does seem to have a full complement of editorial board members, however. I don't disagree with the recommendations, but think it important to 'assume good faith' with publications as well as their editors. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it's a young journal whose notability is not yet established. Additionally, there have been a handful of academic publications from Iran recently nominated for AfD due to notability issues, so this could be a part of some sort of Wiki-wide trend. MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:50, 24 February 2013 (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.