Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recency principle

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 of the debate was well, it ain't delete. I assume one of the "oooh! Rewrite!" champions will be lending a hand when the time comes to improve this article ... fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 13:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recency principle

A concept which appears to be not very notable, not yet anyway. It was listed on a blog by an academic, but the blog is only 2 years old, and the word doesn't seem to have been published? A google search gives 160 hits but most of these pertain to a computer programming concept.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Academics come up with new terms all the time. I don't think WP is the place to make some endless list of all of them. --Ricaud 03:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as neologism. Feezo (Talk) 09:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
• Notes from some googling: 1.) The term has notability and validity as a principle in behavioral psychology formulated by Edwin Ray Guthrie much longer than two years ago. 2.) The way the term is used by the referenced academic is at best tangential to its actual meaning - the actual "recency principle" has nothing to do with criminology; the academic is merely applying it to a type of interrogation tactic. 3.) The WP article in question mischaracterizes the point the academic is making (the "recency principle" is used not to have a suspect incriminate himself, but to allow the interrogator to insert incriminating information onto a recording of the interrogation without the objection of the suspect, who is distracted by a new topic of inquiry). Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 11:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and change completely in light of the above. 1.) add information about interrogator use of the "recency principle" to an article about interrogation tactics. 2.) alter "recency principle" article so that it only includes actual information on the actual recency principle, as described by Edwin Ray Guthrie. I'll do this if no one else wants to. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 11:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep/rewrite since there is a real recency principle in psychology (we have, in fact, had lectures on it very recently). The article is needlessly specific about interrogation, however. -- Mithent 19:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

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.