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. -- Scott ( talk) 00:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Information and media literacy

Information and media literacy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is two topics, which duplicates the contents of media literacy and information literacy both of which have creation date which preceded this article's creation by 2-3 years. Much of it has virtually no citations, which is not a surprise since it just duplicates the contents of the other two articles. There is no reason for this article to exist, anything which can be salvaged should be added to the two respective subtopics, and then it should be deleted. Ethanpet113 ( talk) 08:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep We also have digital literacy, computer literacy, network literacy, &c. We should be bringing this cloud of related topics together rather than separating them. Insofar as respectable organisations use this title for their curriculum and other activities, it ought to be a blue link not a red link. The nomination's plan to retain some of the content also means that we should not use the delete function – see WP:MAD. Andrew D. ( talk) 09:52, 9 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett ( talk) 21:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Unsure - So here's my take. As far as I understand, this topic (IML) isn't really much of a development on the separate concepts of media literacy and information literacy, but more of a shorthand/buzzterm for a particular pedagogical orientation/attitude that combines the two to help people develop practical and critical skills/knowledge. My initial reaction to seeing this AfD is to suggest a merge because the concepts of media and information literacy have, separately, been developed such that they cover the same purposes, overlap, and interconnect, and that we can cover those connections in their respective articles. I'm skeptical, but I'm just not sure (need to do some more research) the extent to which there has been scholarship that not just uses the term "information and media literacy" but develops the concept beyond its two parts. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 06:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete this scholarly article that possesses no inherent, independent, verifiable notability. Subject already and adequately covered in articles such as media literacy, information literacy, etc, yet some editor wants to buzz in something that is not even a neologism. Wikipedia seems of late to be infested with texts that are actually school work. But Wikipedia, despite some WP:SPAs persistent efforts is an encyclopaedia; not a scientific journal nor an indiscriminate listing of information. We should keep it this way. - The Gnome ( talk)

• Weak Delete. This reads more of an essay on the subject and appears to be duplicating the information from the other articles mentioned. Jip Orlando ( talk) 22:12, 3 January 2019 (UTC) reply

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.