Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maynooth Philosophical Papers

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 redirect to Maynooth University#Publications. While there is no need to merge, nor consensus for this to remain as an article, there's no reason not to redirect it to where it's mentioned in case a reader is looking for information. Star Mississippi 01:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maynooth Philosophical Papers

Maynooth Philosophical Papers (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)

As part of cleaning up efforts to bring the article in line with our

WP:GNG
.

I could be convinced of merging to

b} 16:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Delete. Utterly insignificant, a mention at
    WP:GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 16:57, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Redirect to Maynooth University#Publications as an alternative to deletion. StAnselm (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I suggest keeping the entry. Although the journal is small, it does attract frequent citations from other scholars who are in no way connected with it. A quick check on Google Scholar indicates 28 citations just on the first page. A search in Google Books yields a similar positive result, i.e., numerous references. The journal is also of significance in the Irish context, as indicated by its mention in the Irish Times. It is internationally accessible through the database of the Philosophy Documentation Center. Wissembourg (talk) 12:28, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry, but "28 citations just on the first page" is quite frankly pitiable. Insofar as a negative can be proven, this proves lack of notability... --Randykitty (talk) 12:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This wouldn't make a scholar notable. Let alone an entire journal.
b} 13:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This article, in its current form, does not amount to much more than an entry in a list of philosophy journals. The information it contains is readily available elsewhere, for example, here and here. The original version of the entry went beyond this trivial kind of information by including quotations from the journal itself, to illustrate its purpose and contribution to Irish higher education. Unfortunately, an editor felt that this amounted to nothing more than "undue" "puffery." It might be worth considering the entry in its original form. Wissembourg (talk) 09:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please note that quotations from the journal itself (even if it would not be UNDUE puffery) do not contribute to notability. Of course, lengthy statements on the journal's "ethos" are UNDUE puffery and Headbomb was absolutely correct in removing that stuff. --Randykitty (talk) 11:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It should be pointed out that the nom deleted 55% of the article (which had perfectly valid sourcing per wikipedia policy) and then immediately nominated it for deletion. Wow. (!!!) XavierItzm (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sourcing wasn't the issue for what was cut, relevance and puffery was the issue.
b} 16:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:12, 14 August 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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.