This article was closed NAC by Kharkiv07. I tried discussing the issue with them, but they seem to be on a break, so I am taking this here now. My request to Kharkiv07 was to re-open this debate, because none of the three !votes cast were actually policy-based:
"Potential keep", by Peterkingiron, who acknowledges that it is difficult to find sources for subjects like this, but argues that "peer-reviewed journals are probably notable", without any further evidence.
"Keep", by DGG, who argues basically that "cultural bias" is at work here and that "specialized humanities journal, for which our usual standard of being included in major indexes may not be effective." I disagree with that reasoning regarding cultural bias ("I'm all for countering cultural bias by creating articles on notable topics that are neglected by WP. However, I don't think it's a good idea to use "cultural bias" as an argument to keep subjects that do not have any coverage in third-party sources and simply are not notable") as well as the assertion that such journals are rarely included in major indexes (see the similar European Journal of Health Law, which is included in a whole slew of such databases).
"Keep", by the article creator, Legalhistorian11, who argues that the journal is notable because it is held (subscribed to) by several prestigious libraries. Legalhistorian11 repeats the (incorrect) argument that journals like this are rarely included in major databases (see preceding).
As the !votes cast were not (even remotely) based in policy, I think that closing this AfD as "keep", while correct if votes are counted, is not correct. I understand that at this point a "delete" close was not possible, but the correct action to take would have been to relist this discussion and request !votes that are more solidly based in policy. I therefore request that this discussion be re-opened for further discussion. Randykitty (talk) 14:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this is a contested non-admin closure, I am summarily reopening and relisting it in my individual capacity as an administrator. Sandstein 15:12, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
