Talk:Medical Journal of Zambia
Latest comment: 7 years ago by HighFlyingFish in topic Proposed deletion
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proposed deletion
edit@Randykitty can I have at least until tomorrow to respond? I'm really swamped with University homework for the first half of today at least and will need to read up on the relevant policy. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- ?? It's a PROD, so deletion should be after 7 days, that should be time enough. I have some resources for journal articles on my user page (but I've checked them all and couldn't find anything). --Randykitty (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oh huh I see you found Medical journal of Babylon, the page that led me to make this page in the first place. It had been nominated for speedy deletion prior and that speedy deletion was canceled on the reasoning that "speedy deletion for notability does not apply to journals". Isn't this proposed deletion basically for the same reasons, so by that precedent wouldn't it also not apply? I'm sorry I haven't been in communication much, I really haven't had any time to devote to this. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- No, there are differences between speedy deletion and proposed deletion (PROD). Some classes of articles are not eligible for CSD. Any article is eligible for PROD. CSD tags may not be removed by article creators and are acted upon rapidly by an admin, PROD tags can be removed by anybody who disagrees with deletion and are only acted upon by an admin after 7 days. Of course, if such PROD tags are removed, the next step often is a deletion discussion, which cannot be stopped by anybody until an admin determines consensus after 7 days. Unless notability gets shown for these two journals, I would definitely take them to AfD if the PROD tags are removed. Please only remove them if you really have good sources showing they meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG, so that we can avoid wasting the community's time. --Randykitty (talk) 19:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- The Medical Journal of Zambia does have an ISSN (which I am adding to this article now). The Medical Journal of Babylon does not. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oh nevermind, you already added the ISSN. WP:NJournals mentions ISSN specifically as a selective database, so doesn't that confer notability? --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Both of these journals are also listed on the Committee on Publication Ethics database http://publicationethics.org/members/medical-journal-zambia. Unlike the Medical journal of Babylon the Medical Journal of Zambia is searchable via pubmed. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Getting an ISSN is really easy and doesn't say anything about notability. All predatory journals have one, for example. And OA journals get into PubMed via PubMedCentral, which isn't very selective either (anybody who was funded by NIH can uplaod their manuscript into PubMedCentral, making the journal instantly "searchable"). The selective part of PubMed is MEDLINE (and the Index Medicus even more so). --Randykitty (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Both of these journals are also listed on the Committee on Publication Ethics database http://publicationethics.org/members/medical-journal-zambia. Unlike the Medical journal of Babylon the Medical Journal of Zambia is searchable via pubmed. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oh nevermind, you already added the ISSN. WP:NJournals mentions ISSN specifically as a selective database, so doesn't that confer notability? --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- The Medical Journal of Zambia does have an ISSN (which I am adding to this article now). The Medical Journal of Babylon does not. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- No, there are differences between speedy deletion and proposed deletion (PROD). Some classes of articles are not eligible for CSD. Any article is eligible for PROD. CSD tags may not be removed by article creators and are acted upon rapidly by an admin, PROD tags can be removed by anybody who disagrees with deletion and are only acted upon by an admin after 7 days. Of course, if such PROD tags are removed, the next step often is a deletion discussion, which cannot be stopped by anybody until an admin determines consensus after 7 days. Unless notability gets shown for these two journals, I would definitely take them to AfD if the PROD tags are removed. Please only remove them if you really have good sources showing they meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG, so that we can avoid wasting the community's time. --Randykitty (talk) 19:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oh huh I see you found Medical journal of Babylon, the page that led me to make this page in the first place. It had been nominated for speedy deletion prior and that speedy deletion was canceled on the reasoning that "speedy deletion for notability does not apply to journals". Isn't this proposed deletion basically for the same reasons, so by that precedent wouldn't it also not apply? I'm sorry I haven't been in communication much, I really haven't had any time to devote to this. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 19:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I've found a few other pieces about the journal, including on a UNESCO page. Thus, I am formally contesting the PROD since I believe this journal has received sufficient independent coverage, and is notable given its significance in Zambia. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 01:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC)