Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studia Palmyreńskie
- 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 merge to
]Studia Palmyreńskie
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet
WP:GNG." Article dePRODded with reason "deprod, this desevers an AfD. I found two sources which mention its significance in at least few sentences (snippet view prevents checking if the discussion is in-depth), but this is still much more than for most other journals (which may be more cited but never discussed)." However, two in-passing mentions (one in a non-independent source) does not satisfy any notability criterion. PROD reason stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Just like we cannot assume the coverage is in-depth, we cannot assume it is not. As I said, most journals get ZERO coverage, that this one gets some makes it much more notable (in terms of GNG) than most others, even of those others have higher citation counts and such (and therefore are meet WP:NJOURNAL, which this one, admittedly, does not). Still, as I cannot indeed confirm that the sources contain more than mentions in passing, and I couldn't locate anything better, my vote is 'week'.PS. I am fine with merging per comments below as an alternative to deletion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:13, 18 November 2020 (UTC)]
- all, the more, in dubious cases the solution is to merge without prejudice to recreation when notability becomes unquestionable. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Merging to b} 14:22, 18 November 2020 (UTC)]
- merge into parent article is the standard solution in such cases. Valid information, even if does not warrant a separate page. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to alternative to deletion if the notability is borderline/unproven. – Joe (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2020 (UTC)]
- Related discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean. – Joe (talk) 18:15, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions. – Joe (talk) 18:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- 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.