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The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) Whpq (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association[edit]

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

~~Delete~~. No outside reliable, independent reference on notability: both for individual papers and the journal itself. Besides, the sole line in the entry was not updated for the past 3 years. Nahrizuladib (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Nahrizuladib (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep There plenty of mentions in the news and major journals to establish notability. The limited article might be better served by merging it into Norwegian Medical Association until there is sufficient expansion of both.

Merge — into Norwegian Medical Association. "Mentions" do not establish notability, the topic in question must be the "subject" of an article. Gosox(55)(55) 22:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Might not be enough English mentions for us to establish notability, and if so, probably not much chance of expanding this stub.Jarhed (talk) 00:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I expanded the article. The article is indexed by Index Medicus, MEDLINE and PubMed, which is an argument in favor of notability. - Eastmain (talk) 02:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. — Eastmain (talk) 02:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (or indeed merge) but definitely do not delete. We would expect to cover a medical journal with that pedigree. Rich Farmbrough, 03:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Keep Has been in Medline for 45 years, they must do something right. There's enough material for a decent stub, so I don't see the need for merging either (and this article is currently actually larger than the one on the association). Once the AfD is over, the article should be moved to the Norwegian title, which is the official title of the journal. --Crusio (talk) 07:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Without considering the formalities of documenting notability per our guidelines, it is clear from my experience of being a Norwegian that this is an important journal which is often referenced in other media. Therefore it is only a matter of time before the required attestations are in place. __meco (talk) 14:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Upon improvement. ~~Stupid question: do I remove the AfD tag myself, or wait for an admin?~~ I'd like to withdraw my nomination of AfD for this article. Nahrizuladib (talk) 14:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you can at this time. Only before any have voted to delete can the AfD be withdrawn. I'm not sure it can be closed as Speedy Keep per WP:SNOWBALL, though... __meco (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the only "delete" vote was the nom (and given the above "keep" vote, I have struck that one), this AfD can be closed (by an admin or any non-admin editor who knows how to do this... :-) --Crusio (talk) 15:42, 11 January 2010 (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.