Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biologia

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. RL0919 (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Biologia

Biologia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, the only external source is of the publisher. Notability is not inherited and Wiki is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Multi7001 (talk) 17:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. My previous !vote (which I rapidly struck) was due to confusion with another journal with the same title (Biologia (Bratislava), ISSN 0006-3088). This AfD is about the Pakistani journal which, despite a rather long history, does not appear to have been included in any bibliographic/citation index. In-epth reliable sources don't seem to be available either, hence this fails
    WP:GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I did not know there was a Slovakian journal with the same title. If the page reaches a no consensus or avoids deletion, which I firmly doubt it will avoid a deletion, the title of the page should be moved. Multi7001 (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails

WP:GNG. See also Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals): it fails to meet the criteria suggested there.-- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 18:02, 14 January 2022 (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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.