Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theory of Human Sciences

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 delete. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 00:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Theory of Human Sciences, "Theory of human sciences"

Seems to be either original research or possibly a copyvio; the bolded part near the end is a direct copy of an abstract here, and the HTML in the table shows that much of the article was copied and pasted from an MS Office document. The article itself looks like lecture notes, and is certainly not written for a general audience as an encyclopedia should be. There may be a good article to be written on this subject, but as I can't work out what "this subject" actually is, I suspect this isn't it. — Haeleth Talk 23:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/"Theory of human sciences" for the author's other near-identical copy of this article. (Could someone who knows how merge these AfDs, please?) — Haeleth Talk

Combined. Delete both. WP:NOR. --howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 23:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Delete both. Looks like a graduate level term paper pasted into Wikipedia. Durova 01:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete both. He refers to a "Law of Recurrence" in human sciences, but almost all the Google hits for that "law" are in religious, mainly mystyical contexts, with a very few in some kind of astronomical context. - Dalbury (talk) 01:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete both. Durova echoes my thoughts precisely. → Ξxtreme Unction {yak yak yak ł blah blah blah} 12:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - term paper, seminary essay or possibly short research plan. - Skysmith 13:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per above--Rogerd 15:36, 12 November 2005 (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.