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 redirect‎ to List of archaeology journals#Trowel. Malinaccier (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trowel (journal) (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)

Non-notable student publication that fails WP:GNG and WP:NJOURNALS. I cannot find sufficient sources to establish even the basic facts (like whether this student-run journal is even still operating). The only source I can find, that contains anything at all, is the publication's own (wordpress) website. And that hasn't been updated since mid-2019. Five years ago. Where is the indication that this short-lived(?) journal is "considered by reliable sources to be influential in its subject area", or "frequently cited by other reliable sources", or "historically important in its subject area"? Where is the coverage in independent/reliable/verifiable sources? I certainly can't find any. An entry in the "Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals" says that it "does not reach the inclusion threshold" (as its distribution/circulation is too low?). It is also hard to overlook that the article was seemingly created by a COI/SPA contributor (in quasi-promotional format about its 10th edition).... Guliolopez (talk) 16:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 16:35, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Found nothing except a bit on something about theses they publish which is not helpful or sigcov. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If we're going to redirect anywhere it should be the publisher University College Dublin. Redirect-to-lists for journals are annoying. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The journal isn't mentioned in University College Dublin, and I doubt it would be due weight to add mention of it; it's already mentioned in list of archaeology journals. Could you expand on why redirects to lists are a bad thing for journals, beyond being "annoying" to you? – Joe (talk) 03:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  They're often used as citations (though this one would probably not be) and a blue link from that to a list is misleading. I also question the utility of it. It doesn't really add anything. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:10, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to list of archaeology journals as an ATD. – Joe (talk) 12:15, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment. Hi @Joe. While I like a good WP:ATD-R as much as the next editor (perhaps even more so), I don't think I can support it here. I mean, what (reliable/independent) sources are we relying upon for even the basics in the proposed target entry? Even its placement, in the "active publications" section is questionable IMO. As, per Talk:Trowel (journal), there is nothing to indicate that it is "active"? The last entry (on the subject's own primary/wordpress website) indicates that an (PDF/online only?) edition was last released in 2019. And, even UCD's own library hasn't seemingly received a copy of it since 2018? ("Latest Received: 2018 v.19"). That we have to interpret from, effectively, the lack of sources or mentions is far from ideal. I'd question whether we even have sufficient sourcing to support the entry WP:WITHIN the proposed target/list (certainly, to my eye, there is nothing to support its inclusion in the "active" section...) Guliolopez (talk) 11:02, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The list states the journal's name, publisher, year of first publication, and ISSN. Which of those is not verifiable? We don't need independent sources for a redirect. If the journal is no longer published, then it can just be moved to the other section of the list. – Joe (talk) 12:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  (edit conflict) The journal is a reliable primary source for its own contents and does include publication details: [1] [2]. In any event, a search for "Trowel"+"department of archaeology"+dublin rapidly brings up citations in GBooks, book reviews [3] [4] and other commentary [5]. WP:WITHIN is an essay arguing against the creation of standalone articles, not redirects. If the entry is in the wrong section of the list, then either move it to the correct section, or merge the two sections (the second section is very short, and the division into sections makes the list more "dynamic" than it perhaps needs to be). James500 (talk) 12:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of archaeology journals per Joe Roe. The journal is included in the list, so it is the appropriate target. A row anchor should be included in the table. Linking to a row anchor is not misleading. James500 (talk) 01:52, 20 August 2024 (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.