Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Free and Open Source Software Law Review
 | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2010 January 30. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- 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. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- International Free and Open Source Software Law Review (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
New journal, no independent sources establishing notability. Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals). Prod removed with justification " I expect sources can be found or will soon be findable" (see WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Article creation premature, time only will tell whether this journal will become notable. Crusio (talk) 20:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Crusio (talk) 20:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- Crusio (talk) 20:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Too new to have attracted much notability yet; no sign of passing Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals). —David Eppstein (talk) 07:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, with some reluctance. I hope the Journal becomes notable soon, but I can't find any evidence of it. If it gets up steam and has a few issues, has some articles that get cited in other journals or maybe even an court opinion, that'd be great. But so far, the only mentions I can find of it are reports that ultimately stem only from the Journal's own announcement of its first issue. I suggest that the authoring editor WP:USERFY a current copy for re-creation if it every becomes appropriate. TJRC (talk) 02:06, 12 November 2009 (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.