- 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 was no consensus. Sandstein 06:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Concision (media studies)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Concision (media studies) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined speedy deletion; however, this is not based on any reliable sourcing. The best thing to do here is delete the article and start from scratch IMO Bangalamania ( talk) 20:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. This Google Scholar search may be helpful. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I received a notice about this since I'm technically the article creator (even though all I did was transfer it from the main article), so I ran a few searches. It looks like there's a chapter on the topic in this book (starting pg 165), part of which can be seen in the preview. I also found brief discussions here and here, although they are not the main topic in either case. Sunrise ( talk) 03:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. Easily passes WP:SIGCOV. Noam Chomsky writes on it here and speaks on it here. There are two quality refs already cited in the article, and plenty more RS in google books and google scholar. The article is not in such bad shape that WP:TNT is warranted. WP:AFD is not cleanup. The solution is to improve through editing. 4meter4 ( talk) 21:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (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.
- 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 was no consensus. Sandstein 06:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Concision (media studies)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Concision (media studies) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined speedy deletion; however, this is not based on any reliable sourcing. The best thing to do here is delete the article and start from scratch IMO Bangalamania ( talk) 20:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. This Google Scholar search may be helpful. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I received a notice about this since I'm technically the article creator (even though all I did was transfer it from the main article), so I ran a few searches. It looks like there's a chapter on the topic in this book (starting pg 165), part of which can be seen in the preview. I also found brief discussions here and here, although they are not the main topic in either case. Sunrise ( talk) 03:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. Easily passes WP:SIGCOV. Noam Chomsky writes on it here and speaks on it here. There are two quality refs already cited in the article, and plenty more RS in google books and google scholar. The article is not in such bad shape that WP:TNT is warranted. WP:AFD is not cleanup. The solution is to improve through editing. 4meter4 ( talk) 21:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (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.