Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/China Review International

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 Withdrawn by nom and no other "delete" !votes. Randykitty (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

China Review International

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

~~Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.~~ Randykitty (talk) 08:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 08:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China and Hawaii. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn per the souorces found by Cunard. --Randykitty (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Barrett, T. H. (June 1995). "China Review International, Vol. 1, no. 1, Spring 1994. 303 pp. Honolulu: Hawaii Center for Chinese Studies and University Press". Bulletin of the School of Oriental & African Studies. 58 (2): 439. doi:10.1017/S0041977X00011745. Retrieved 2023-03-20.
  The article notes: "... the case for a single periodical devoted entirely to reviewing monographs on China ancient, modern and contemporary—even if confined as it is at present to English-language monographs, with a few in Chinese thrown in for good measure—will doubtless appeal to many librarians and individual researchers in Chinese studies. Given the reluctance south of the Canadian border to read anything in French, and the extremely rapid publication schedule indicated by the publication dates of some of the works reviewed, this appeal will probably rival or even eclipse that of the existing Revue Bibliographique de Sinologie, though there is no indication that the invaluable abstracts of articles included in that excellent publication are to be included in the new journal. We are, however, promised a flow of 'features', meaning the more extended review articles of the type which preface this first issue: ... One would have liked to have seen some of the longer pieces buried also in the body of the reviews signalled in some way in the table of contents, too."
2. Rawson, Jessica (1996-02-23). "China under review". Times Higher Education Supplement. Archived from the original on 2023-03-20. Retrieved 2023-03-20.
  The article notes: "Produced by the University of Hawaii centre for Chinese studies, this new journal aims to review books relating to all aspects of sinology. The editors intend to cover books in many disciplines, from art to economics, from linguistics to Chinese medicine. But their intention has limitations, for, so far, the journal has concentrated largely on books in English. It is of course wise to avoid the mass of books in Chinese or Japanese, which are covered in other specialised journals. But the range covered is inevitably influenced by this constraint. ... For British scholars and all university libraries with even the slightest interests in any of the fields touched upon by Chinese studies, this is an indispensable reference tool."
3. Less significant coverage:
  1. Ye, Yunshun (2014). The ALA Guide to Researching Modern China. Chicago: American Library Association. p. 182. ISBN 978-0-8389-1209-6. Retrieved 2023-03-20 – via Google Books.
    The book provides one sentence of coverage about the subject. The book notes: "China Review International (University of Hawaii Press). This quarterly journal publishes English-language reviews of recently published books and monographs from China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, the United States, and elsewhere to help scholars keep abreast of cutting-edge research in Chinese Studies."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow China Review International to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources provided by Cunard should be enough for significant coverage. Mucube (talk • contribs) 22:13, 20 March 2023 (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.