Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civilica

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. Daniel (talk) 03:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Civilica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable website. Can't find any RS in English or Farsi. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – it exists, but there's no coverage that goes beyond trivial single-sentence passing mentions. Barring something more, this site fails WP:WEBCRIT/the GNG. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete with regrets - it seems to be the primary indexing service for scholarly conference proceedings in Iran, and I see mentions (but not coverage) of it on non-Iranian sites. This is enough of a claim of significance to prevent WP:A7 speedy deletion, but unfortunately not enough to pass WP:GNG. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not enough sources Sahaib (talk) 19:56, 7 August 2021 (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.