Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brain dump


 * 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 delete. ST47 (talk) 13:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Brain dump

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced WP:DICDEF. This is more suited for Wiktionary. shoy (reactions) 15:08, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. shoy (reactions) 15:08, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep/merge This is a reasonable topic and the main point of WP:DICDEF is that we should gather such topics under a common heading, rather than having a separate entry for each form of words. As a formal process, I know this as a transfer of information and that redirects to knowledge transfer.  Another reasonable title for this is a debriefing.  By the current title of "brain dump", the activity seems to be recognised as a pedagogical technique – see Brain Dumps: Write Down Everything You Can Remember, for example.  And there are lots of self-help or journalling books which have this in their title.  So, there seems to be plenty of options here to explore and so we should retain the page for further development per policies such as WP:ATD, WP:IMPERFECT and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 15:49, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete a dictionary definition without the contextual and historical information needed to make an article encyclopedic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - It's not worthy of an article, but could be a "dab" or Wiktionary page. Bearian (talk) 14:33, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andrew D. Agreed that this is a workable article (see here for one possible source). There's a lot of hits in my university database search, including peer reviewed journal articles. It seems like there might even be more than one possible article here with the need for disambiguation. Right now the page is serving as a placeholder or disambiguation like page for three possible areas of coverage that need expansion.4meter4 (talk) 08:27, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Britishfinance (talk) 19:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fifthavenuebrands (talk) 13:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced DICDEF - if you want to add it to Wiktionary, go ahead, but there's nothing sourced here so nothing to merge. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 03:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article looks more like a dictionary definition, and nothing to merge here. Jay (talk) 08:04, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as a dicdef. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:43, 22 November 2019 (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.