Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geophysical Research Abstracts

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 merge to European Geosciences Union. Spartaz ^Humbug! 03:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Geophysical Research Abstracts[edit]

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

Non-notable journal. Only publishes the abstracts of one single scientific meeting. No inependent sources. Not listed in any selective major database. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Crusio (talk) 16:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Coverage of this publication is localized to only one yearly conference for one specific society, and not an encyclopedic topic. It is lacking in coverage from independent reliable sources, does not have an impact factor, and is not indexed in any major databases. Therefore, this publication does not meet the criteria for WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 02:37, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with EGU. Also I have a hard time believing this isn't indexed in a major database. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If you go by the title, yes, then you would expect it to be listed in some major databases. However, once you realize that this does not publish any articles/reviews, etc, but only abstracts, not being listed becomes understandable. In addition, the only abstracts published are from one single meeting. Concerning a "merge", I could see this as one line in the article on the EGU (something like "... and the abstracts are published as Geophysical Research Abstracts (ISSN XYZ)"). --Crusio (talk) 05:28, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with EGU Agree with Headbomb. This journal is unlikely to become notable as it only covers abstract of presentations (and posters) at a single conference. It can easily be mentioned or detailed on the page of the organization. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 16:58, 14 July 2011 (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.