Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Journal of Social Pedagogy

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

International Journal of Social Pedagogy[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:NJOURNAL as far as I can see. Cabe 6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 09:36, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Not sure how the journal doesn't meet WP:NJOURNAL. It addresses an academic field that is gaining traction in English-speaking countries and is well-established in other European countries. Contributors to the first issue are internationally well-known, and the editorial board includes academics from University of London, University of Athens, University of Strathclyde, VIA University College Aarhus, University of Bangor, University of Portsmouth and Gent University. Gabriel.eichsteller (talk) 10:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Gabe[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NJournals decisively, as well as WP:GNG. No independent sources. Not included in any selective major database. None of the arguments given above by one of the journal's editors has anything to do with notability. Journal is rather new and only 2 issues have one issue has been published yet. Article creation vastly premature. --Randykitty (talk) 14:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This subject does not meet criteria for WP:NJournals and general notability standards for Wikipedia articles because this journal is not listed in any selective databases and is not covered by other independent reliable sources. Also, this publication probably has not been in existence long enough to develop notability. However, looking at the web site and the title of the articles available, it certainly has potential, and may merit inclusion at a later date. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 22:25, 23 July 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.