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. ✗plicit 01:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Computational Engineering and Physical Modeling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal, article created by COI editor. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article dePRODded by creator after edits by a SPA and themselves, but nothing addresses the lack of notability (indexing in DOAJ and GScholar is basically trivial and EBSCOhost is not particularly selective). In short, PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per RK Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I could not find any criteria by which the journal satisfies GNG or NJournals. In addition, I was unable to find a good redirect target to say a publisher or academic body. This may be a case of an article being written too soon--perhaps it will be included in selective indices at some point. But until then, we have no independent sources on which to base an article and there are seemingly no good alternatives to deletion. Hence, delete. --((u|Mark viking)) {Talk} 00:27, 30 March 2022 (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.