Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Alternative Pespectives in the Social Sciences

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. Cirt (talk) 05:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of Alternative Pespectives in the Social Sciences

An academic journal that has never been published, therefore has no measurable impact to scholars. the first issue is suppose to be scheduled for December 2008 and it might become notable after then - if it is indeed published (because I don't have a WP:CRYSTALBALL). Cameron Scott (talk) 01:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficient evidence of “notability”; for example, the authors presently attached to the project don't seem to be themselves “notable” — their listed publications are electronic “vanity press” stuff. This publication might later prove “notable” or even revolutionary, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Good luck to them. —SlamDiego_←T 03:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Further comment: There seems to be a conflict of interest issue, in that the article was created by an editor with an alias which is the last name of a member of the editorial board. I would presumed good faith here even if that were not policy of Wikipedia, but good-faith edits can still be skewed. —SlamDiego_←T 03:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added comment: Note the names and positions of the Advisory Board. There are two more von Feigenblatts, one an “Itinerant Ambassador of Panama to the Middle East”, the other “Consul General of Equatorial Guinea to San Jose (Costa Rica)” and previously “Consul General of the Republic of Costa Rica to Alicante (Spain)”. Thin smoke and dull mirrors. —SlamDiego_←T 12:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't think its notable yet; given its being published by grad students in the department, I think the odds are that it will not be, so I wouldnt have an article at this state. If it becomes notable, and a few such journals have, it can be added. I note that journals even before publication announced by really major publishers with really important editors in chief and editorial boards can become notable immediately, just as a new novel by a really major author. (though as a librarian, I've usually waited until there has been at least a table of contents for the first issue available before spending the money). DGG (talk) 04:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article can be recreated in case the journal becomes notable. --Hans Adler (talk) 06:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Gotta say I like their alternative perspective on the spelling sciences, though.John Z (talk) 08:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kill it with fire, pure vanity piece for an unpublished journal. Should be a slam dunk; the thing doesn't even exist yet. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 09:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A lot of publications go belly up before even publishing their first issue. This article should be nuked until the journal actually exists so it can be evaluated. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Future publications can be notable in spite of WP:CRYSTAL if they get wide publicity in reliable sources. This is not one of those cases. EdJohnston (talk) 18:01, 28 October 2008 (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.