Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay's Journal of Anomalies

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 Ricky Jay. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jay's Journal of Anomalies

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

Not a notable magazine. Beerest355 Talk 00:51, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough coverage about the Journal itself to warrant a stand-alone article. Redirect to Ricky Jay.  Senator2029 ➔ “Talk”  03:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The book compiling the issues seems to have been reviewed in a couple of publications. If it's not notable enough for its own article, then it certainly deserves mention at Ricky Jay. CtP (t • c) 18:52, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Deletion is wrong since it could be merged to Ricky Jay. Independent notability is marginal, though. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ricky Jay, no independent notability is evident. --Randykitty (talk) 14:26, 29 July 2013 (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.