Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Atrial Fibrillation

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of Atrial Fibrillation[edit]

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

Delete. No outside independent reference on notability: both for individual papers and the journal itself. Nahrizuladib (talk) 13:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Nahrizuladib (talk) 13:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment DOAJ listing assures that this is a scholarly journal. It doesn't provide much info to reference though, and NLM (haven't checked other library catalogs) haven't written anything independent on it, so it would be a very short stub (still better than nothing in my opinion). Narayanese (talk) 18:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and recheck in 6 months I doubt this is a hoax, but as a new journal, it will be hard to find good sourcing that demonstrates its notability. Check back in 6 months to a year, maybe? By then it should have gained at least the attention of a major medical library. Bonewah (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I found a brief mention of it in an article about the recent profusion of new cardiology journals:[1] At least it's in PubMed.[2] Fences&Windows 02:02, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment According to the cover image it is already 18 months old which means it has 5-6 issues out already. There's no point in waiting as Bonewah suggested. That said, journals tend not to be written about much; its notability should be determined based on the impact of the material it has published and the editors and organizations attached to the journal. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 09:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Very young journal, no independent sources. Also, no encyclopedic content in article. Think about it; the title tells you all you need to know; it's a journal about Atrial Fibrillation. Abductive (reasoning) 21:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NOTABILITY no significant 3rd party coverage or any impact which would indicate notability. RP459 (talk) 04:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Journals generally don't have "3rd party coverage" as one normally expects, but I would like to see a "real" service indexing the journal ([3]) or some 3rd party review (other than announcements) -- neither of which I found, but only on a quick google search. If these exist, I would love to reconsider. jheiv (talk) 03:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In contrast to what is mentioned on the journal's site, it is not indexed in PubMed. --Crusio (talk) 09:57, 28 December 2009 (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.