Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studies in Communication and Media

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. Missvain (talk) 01:09, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Studies in Communication and Media

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article dePRODded with reason "Improved the page by adding 2 extra sources that mention this journal (International Communication Association and International Association for Media and Communication Research". "Sources" added are promotional blurbs (probably provided by the journal itself, given that both associations use the same text). PROD reason stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:29, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, a merge to German Communication Association would be better, but since that doesn't exist, delete. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Based on a quick Scholar search, articles published in this journal are cited a good bit in other academic journals in this field, which appears to denote some notability. Having said that, I could also live with a merge into International Communication Association as a possible secondary option.--Concertmusic (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:58, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:28, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Can't find enough sourcing to support passing WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~DELETE: fails JOURNALCRIT The Ace in Spades (talk) 12:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC)~~ — The Ace in Spades (talk • contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Waskerton (talk • contribs). [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.