Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theory in Action
Article creation seems |premature. Most of the above arguments come down to "", with the exception of the argument about library holdings. However, part of these holdings will be through general access services like EBSCO (meaning a library did not really decide to subscribe to the journal, but just lists it because it gets it as part of a package deal), so I'd like to see a bit more solid evidence for notability than that. If the journal is as good as people here claim, it will soon garner either independent sources or be included in reputable ''selective'' databases. At the moment, though, |we cannot say
— User:Guillaume2303, 15:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:TOOSOON||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:CRYSTAL (Wikipedia:Too soon)