- 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. — Spaceman Spiff 05:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Plebs Journal of Law
- Plebs Journal of Law ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined Prod, WP:TOOSOON, law journal that has yet to publish an article, fails notability. GregJackP Boomer! 08:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as original PRODder. Doesn't meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. I wouldn't be surprised if this ended up on Beall's list, if it still is around a few months from now and ever manages to attract authors (not really likely, given the low quality homepage full of ungrammatical error, not really what you expect from legal scholars). -- Randykitty ( talk) 08:56, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Randykitty ( talk) 08:58, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Randykitty ( talk) 08:58, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Delete again: I'm pretty sure that I !voted to delete before. It isn't a journal, first. Plebs don't exist, second. The journal is not discussed by third parties, third. Hithladaeus ( talk) 18:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- I guess you mean the AfD for the association. I reckoned that this was different enough not to be eligible for speedy deletion as a recreation (and it was created before that AfD got closed anyway). -- Randykitty ( talk) 18:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- My mistake. I did read this article entirely and based my motion entirely on what it said. The journal can't really achieve notability before it. . . you know. . . exists. Apologies for the confusion.
Hithladaeus (
talk) 01:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- No need to apologize, the confusion stems from the (probably COI) editor pushing these two highly similar articles. -- Randykitty ( talk) 08:51, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- My mistake. I did read this article entirely and based my motion entirely on what it said. The journal can't really achieve notability before it. . . you know. . . exists. Apologies for the confusion.
Hithladaeus (
talk) 01:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as per above. My unfiltered search found nothing.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 01:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
- Keep in India, you haste to delete. 117.225.56.42 ( talk) 08:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC) — 117.225.56.42 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:26, 29 June 2015 (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.