Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seminars in Integrative Medicine

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 --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seminars in Integrative Medicine[edit]

Delete medical journals are not inherently notable and this unsourced one-line article about a defunct journal that lasted only 2 years makes no assertion of notability. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is was a legitimate peer-reviewed medical journal ~~that is listed in the PubMed database.[1]~~ The stub was just created a day or two ago, let's give it some time to flesh out. --Elonka 21:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Updated comment, apologies for the misinformation, I got carried away with the copy/pastes. -El on ka 18:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with Elonka, this is a premature nomination for deletion.
- Delete. On second thought, it is discontinued. Two years is not long enough for notability. II | (t - c) 01:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete discontinued journal, WOW THE FIRST ONE TO have actually support of a REAL AfD!!! Medicellis (talk) 17:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not around long enough to be important. Tim Vickers (talk) 15:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Contrary to Fabrictramp's comment, this does NOT exist in PubMed. I tried through the link she cited above, as well as using multiple other methods including viewing the full list of journals. It is not there. I also haven't found it in any other major journal or research databases. As far as I can tell—I didn't go checking out every article—not one of its articles has ever been cited in any other publication. This all screams "Delete me!" Skittleys (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have expanded the stub, with an infobox, image, and links. I understand that it is a discontinued journal, but I still feel that it is useful to maintain a Wikipedia article on it, as it was a peer-reviewed journal (it was already listed at "Missing Journals"). Further, this journal is being used as a source in other Wikipedia articles,[2] and having a stub gives easy access to the journal's archives, which assists with verification. --El on ka 18:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Uncertain One of the standards for the notability of a journal is its length of publication. a new journal can be notable if obviously important, and a discontinued one if notable enough in its lifetime. But very few journals of this sort introduced by major publishers are discontinued as quickly as this, so it is an indication that nobody much cared to subscribe. As medic DGG (talk) 18:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that there was limited impact. However, it is still used as a source in various Wikipedia articles, and elsewhere in academia. I noticed one article that was cited in over a hundred different locations, according to Google Scholar.[3] --El on ka 18:23, 15 July 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.