Deletion of Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Comment: Individual AfDs are not a good way to change policy, and in any case this is a bad test case as it seems to pass  (e.g. the mentions in Stankus, added to the article, and the JCR listing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: the only "delete" !vote (apart from the nom) just was changed to "keep". Given the large number of policy-based "keep" !votes, I think that we have some unseasonal (atleast for the Northern Hemisphere) |snow here
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: and I support trouting as well. It easily passes  with flying colors. Also per Crusio and DGG. In addition
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NJOURNALS)

Comment: All these so-called "commercial" connections are of a superficial view, although I am sure it is in good faith . As was stated above by DGG (in so many words)  these "Proceedings" are part of a supportive and interconnected system. Even a seperate and competing publisher has faith in the impact factor http://about.elsevier.com/impactfactor/author-reports-4601929/webpage/author-webpage-4601929.html as a rating system. This set of journals are also listed in other Thomson Rueters' databases http://science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&ISSN=1751-6161, http://science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&ISSN=0749-6419, http://science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&ISSN=1359-4311, etc., etc. There is no playing favorites here. Here are the services that index two of these journals http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journalabstracting.cws_home/762/abstracting#abstracting, http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/630/description#description. Also, I see no problem with Anton's editing behavior
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)