Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mind myths

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 DELETE then REDIRECT. dbenbenn | talk 16:20, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mind myths

This was a recreation of Mind Myths by User:144.214.54.82, which was nominated for deletion in January (see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Mind Myths) with the consensus to merge with Brain. Normally, this should have been speedied as a recreation of deleted material. Instead, it was cleaned up and expanded a bit. When I found it on Jan 18, I felt that it was unencyclopedic, but noticed that most of the information seemed to reference a single book (Mind Myths by Sergio Della Sala). Because of this, I changed the subject of the article from "mind myths" themselves, to this book. On January 27, User:144.214.54.82 changed the subject back. I reverted this on February 10, but User:Paranoid reverted me the next day. We began discussing this on the talk page, when User:dbenbenn pointed out that this article had already been deleted.

There are two version for this page. I feel that both should be deleted. If the article is about "mind myths" themselves, it is unencyclopedic and has already been deleted once. If the article is about the book, Mind Myths, it is non-notable (its Amazon.com rank is over 1,000,000). -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 09:57, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

  • delete - I disagree that it would necessarily be unencyclopedic in the first case, but in its current form it has nothing that can't be covered in brain.
  • If the article is about "mind myths" themselves, it is unencyclopedic and has already been deleted once. — No, it has already been kept once. A consensus to "merge" is a consensus to keep, and to merge. Uncle G 12:34, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)
    • This is a pointless fork of material, including the book reference, that has already been merged into brain. Redirect to brain, Deleting beforehand according to taste. Uncle G 18:16, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)
    • The information was merged into brain. Everything that was deemed worthy of keeping already exists there, this is just a duplicate. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 20:43, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as potential fork, otherwise this isn't an encyclopedic classification. Wyss 18:04, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Brain. Megan1967 00:59, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Brain. JamesBurns 06:43, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • My vote would be to expand the article to cover pseudopsychology, a subject with no entry at present. GPJ

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.