Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Causal layered analysis


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 09:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Causal layered analysis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a promotional piece designed to broadcast the ideas of one Sohail Inayatullah, whose bio I just deleted under wp:g11. Significantly edited by and all the references are related to Sohail Inayatullah or his "metafuture" organization. I allow the possibility that CLA is a real thing outside of the ideas of Sohail Inayatullah, but I invoke WP:TNT. Perhaps someone who understands these things can stub it with some reliable sourcing in lieu of deletion, that would be fine. Otherwise, delete -- Y not? 16:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * On the contrary: Causal Layered Analysis is a highly regarded futures methodology, well-cited and widely used. I realise that the editors here may not be familiar with futures studies, but although CLA was originally developed by Sohail Inayatullah, it is not a personal vehicle for him. It is possible that the text needs clarifying but deletion would be an error that would diminish Wikipedia's credibility in this area.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thereflector (talk • contribs) 12:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Please Keep It. I have been using CLA in my professional work as a strategist and have been teaching it to students from around the world. I teach it along with more traditional tools of strategy and foresight such as game theory, scenario planning and others, and my students always tell me how CLA adds a completely new dimension to their thinking and approach that other methods can't provide. I myself learned about it in a graduate program in a university (not taught by Dr Inayatullah). The fact that the author of this approach happens to be alive and practicing the method he developed isn't a reason enough to delete it. Futures is a relatively young discipline and a lot of its pioneers are still alive. Does that mean we can't use Wikipidia to spread their work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwarang7 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as incoherent gibberish. Part of me thinks this is some sort of bizarre commentary on the use of buzzwords and non-sequitirs in philosophy, but that still doesn't belong on Wikipedia.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC).
 * Delete or merge. While futures techniques are probably notable, this consists entirely of original research. Bearian (talk) 18:06, 18 February 2014 (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.