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.
Fails notability requirements. Relies on two media sources and an academic source from ten years ago, a third media source fails verification, and two sections have no citations. No ongoing notability or relevance. Seems like it was only ever known because of one person and never widely used
Softlemonades (
talk)
16:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Andrevan:, the specific source you cite is a 1948 piece that discusses journalism focused on Science rather than Julian Assange's concept. As noted on the top of the article nominated for deletion, the article nominated for deletion "Scientific journalism" is not to be confused with "
Science journalism", which is a different concept altogether. — Red-tailed hawk(nest)00:59, 15 August 2022 (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.