Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies

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. Sandstein 06:21, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies

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

Article was PRODded with reason "No independent sources, not covered in any selective major databases. does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." It was de-PRODded with comments on the talk page asserting notability based on the unique concept of the journal and the high profile of contributors. However, sources are still not available and the original PROD reason stands. Hence: Delete. Crusio (talk) 03:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answers

it is the only journal that convenes symposia and in-depth conferences on books in legal theory.

In addition to being a journal it provides an opportunity for writers to meet their critics.

The sumposia are events with tens of participants and many writers are applying to be included and those who are are included are among leading in their fields: Will Kymlicka (the father of the multi-culturalism movement), Adrian Vermeule from Harvard University, John Gardner in criminal law, from Oxford University and others.
Here are the list of figures whom will write the articles to the upcoming issues, they include Jack Balkin and Paul Kahn (in constitutional law) both of them from Yale Law School, Rae Langton from the Department of philosophy, MIT, Ariel Porat (Tort), (Chicago Law School and Tel Aviv Law School), Eyal Benvenisty (International law), (New York University School of Law and Tel Aviv Law School).

Tzahy (talk) 10:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yoc can also find about it in Hein. Tzahy (talk) 13:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do copy-paste from an e-mail that Prof. Barak Medina, dean of the Hebrew University Law faculty, sent to all students and faculty members (it's not a private mail, it distributed to a large number of peoples and I got their consent to upload it here):

שיתוף פעולה עם הוצ' אוקספורד בהוצאה לאור של כתב עת

בהמשך להסכם שיתוף הפעולה שלנו עם הוצאת הספרים של אוניברסיטת קיימברידג' להוצאה לאור של ה- Israel Law Review, אני שמח לבשר על השגת הסכמה עם הוצאת הספרים של אוניברסיטת אוקספורד לשיתוף פעולה בהוצאה לאור של ה- Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies.

And the english translation:

Coperation witn Oxford Universy Press for a journal publishing

Following our cooperation with Cambridge University Press that published Israel Law Journal, I'm glad to announce about our agreement with Oxford University Press to cooperate in publishing Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies. Tzahy (talk) 10:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tzahy. Also, we have to remember that the journal is new (2010), so we can not expect to find it in major databases. I did find it in Legal Research instructors at Stanford Law School, here and here. Also, the well-known professors who edit it, and the list of respectful and important professors who wrote there, are the best indication for the importance of the journal. The fact that it is going to work with Oxford University Press just prove that. For all those reason I think we should keep the article. RF123 (talk) 10:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment None of the links you give above are independent reliable sources. And, as you say, "the journal is new (2010), so we can not expect to find it in major databases", meaning that any speculation as to its notability falls afoul of WP:NOTCRYSTAL. As for OUP, we only have an email from the journal's editor, not an acceptable source, either. That well-known people edit/contribute is not relevant either. --Crusio (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Professors from Yale, Hebrew University, University of Texas, Harvard Law School, Georgetown University Law Center and many more, are very important indication. I think they would not write in the journal if they did not think it's important or it will contribute to their professional advancement. RF123 (talk) 11:52, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That may very well be, but it is not one of the criteria for notability (either WP:NJournals or WP:GNG). --Crusio (talk) 12:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A journal who is being published by the faculty of law of the Hebrew university and who in which leading jurists and philosophers ([1]) are participating, does absolutely meet the notability criteria. --Jys1442 (talk) 13:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the word "notability" has a very special meaning on WP, it has nothing to do with good/bad/worthwhile/etc. The appropriate guidelines have been linked above. Please indicate how any one of the notability criteria of either one of those guidelines you think is being met? --Crusio (talk) 13:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, my reply above was written with full awareness of the the Wikipedia guidelines for notability, and with clarification why it meets the criteria. --Jys1442 (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Decent level of GScholar hits for a journal that's only up to Volume II, notable contributors. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per Hullaballoo Wolfowitz. The notable writers are more than enough to establish notability of the journal. Broccolo (talk) 19:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I also strongly believe that in this case the notability of the contributors, the quality of their contributions and the notability of the editing house makes the journal notable, despite its short past Cpt.schoener (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Cpt.schoener --Yoavd (talk) 10:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hullaballoo Wolfowitz. James500 (talk) 05:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see this journal indexed in Ulrich's, Journal Citation Reports, or any major selective scholarly databases. Although notable scholars may contribute to this journal, that does not make the journal itself notable (per WP:NJournals). However, I did find that it was indexed in HeinOnline, a legal research database - but that's the only place I've found it indexed. If the journal itself is notable, we should be able to find plenty of third-party, scholarly references to the journal itself, so it might be worth it to delete this article until the journal is indexed more broadly (which may take a few years). Phoenixred (talk) 20:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Hullaballoo Wolfowitz. Very notable contributors for a new journal. Itzuvit (talk) 07:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTINHERITED, do I really have to keep repeating that? --Crusio (talk) 09:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, good coverage in Google Scholar, indexed by HeinOnline, association with Oxford University Press. — Cirt (talk) 05:03, 2 November 2011 (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.