Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family/State paradigm

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. No consensus. -- AllyUnion (talk) 16:57, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Family/State paradigm

Original research. "Family/State paradigm" gets no Google hits outside Wikipedia and its clones - SimonP 06:39, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, POV original research/essay. Megan1967 08:33, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I have heard of this concept before now, and the article has references. Also, the notes about Lakoff's research are accurate, as I heard him interviewed regarding this very subject last year on NPR or PRI. HyperZonk^talk 18:09, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
• We might not have the name right but I have also heard of this theory outside Wikipedia. Keep. Rossami (talk) 06:41, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Original, POV, idiosyncratic synthesis of primary sources from many centuries, in support of the original (unreferenced, unsupported by scholarship) idea that they are somehow all saying the same thing. Wikipedia:No original research applies to novel and POV synthesis of primary sources, as well as unreferenced opinion. The primary author of the page is extraordinarily defensive and will not allow others to edit it collaboratively, apparently misunderstanding Wikipedia:Ownership of articles, so it's unlikely to improve. -- Rbellin|Talk 02:17, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The Recycling Troll 09:43, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, POV original research. Merge anything salvageable to George Lakoff. RadicalSubversiv E 20:41, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • On further review, much of this is in fact legitimate material, although it strings together vaguely-related ideas under a novel term. Perhaps Paternalism would be a good merge target for some of it? RadicalSubversiv E 20:50, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Just to clarify, this is a vote to merge somewhere, then delete (no redirect). RadicalSubversiv E 18:28, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Many people have pointed out the family and used the organization of the family to uphold monarchy and classical republicansim. It is "knowledge" that people would be interested in knowing and it is good for philosophy and political research. WHEELER 14:20, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Note that WHEELER has been the primary author of this article. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:25, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Essay, POV, original research. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:25, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and clean up. I heard of the concept back in college in a "overview of ancient philosophy" class. I'm not sure this is the correct name for it, though. --Carnildo 20:34, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete As Rbellin says, this is the author's own idiosyncratic synthesis of primary-source material and as such it constitutes original research. SlimVirgin 22:47, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I've heard of the concept before, so it's not original, but I can't remember now what it's usually called. Good odds that we have an article on the subject, just not linked well enough to find. Incidentally, the identity of the contributor should be irrelevant to VfD decision. Stan 16:20, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but do some serious cleaning up along the lines suggested by SlimVirgin's comment (and give it a change of title; the misuse of the technical term 'paradigm' makes it look more like a lit.crit./critical theory article). The relationship between the state and the family is a central one in political and social philosophy, and this theory genuinely exists and is discussed widely. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:28, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.