Deletion of Forum of Mathematics

Comment: per , . However, I did find some third party coverage (even though possibly just a regurgitated press release) at knowledgespeak.com. I've failed to get a specific URL for it but a search for "Cambridge University Press waives author charges for new OA mathematics journals" retrieves it. It's dated 03 Jul 2012. Clicking "Forward this" doesn't produce a URL either, but an HTML email
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NJOURNAL||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: An IP editor added to the article some non-neutral phrases like "high-quality" and "prestigious", however these have now been removed and the rest of the article is purely factual, therefore  and  do not apply to the content of this article. Since the journals aren't available yet, the guideline ournals is clearly not applicable to this situation. The article does mention future dates but these refer to the announced schedule - they are not predictions, therefore  does not apply either. The subject of the article has been covered in the media as the main topic of a news article so certainly passes the criteria in  - the content of the article can easily be verified from the sources listed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:PEACOCK||WP:PUFFERY||WP:NJ||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:GNG)

Comment: The three links at the end of the article consitute the significant coverage required by , in my opinion.  In response to some issues raised above
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The situation here is analogous to Windows 8; although not yet released, it soon will be. The Forum of Mathematics is |notable as it has received significant press coverage. In addition, the statements in the article are |verified by |reliable sources. I hope this helps. With regards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: per  these may one day be notable but they aren't yet, per the nomination
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Sorry, but I am not seeing widespread noteriety pertaining to this annoucement -- please see http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=forum+of+mathematics&oq=forum+of+mathematics&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i400.11919.30549.0.31611.42.5.2.35.0.0.90.375.5.5.0...0.0.N_VXrvV7ekY here and http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=forum+of+mathematics&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C22&as_sdtp= here. This doesn't really satisfy   (at this time). Also, I don'see how this is an intersting development more than any other Open Access journal that has been established in the last few years. Some have become notable (and worthy of inclusion) and some have not. Unfortunately, this journal has not had enough time to establish noteriety of any sort. Also, of course, the prestige of the founders and editors is not inherited by the journal itself. Also a blog post is not necessarily a  reliable source
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS)

Comment: or incubate'''&nbsp; The speculation here is |not of interest to Wikipedia at this time, as we don't need to speculate about the future, we can wait for it.&nbsp; Looks like this topic needs to wait until at least January 2013 to come back, and possibly January 2014.&nbsp; If it makes anyone happier, then incubate it.&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)