Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creativity and mental health


 * 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 keep. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Creativity and mental health

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Basically I think that this article is original research. It's written by student(s) in an essay like format using primary sources and has a lot of original synthesis. This would be better placed in a student assignment or a submission to a medical journal. I don't think there is any salvagable content here and so propose deletion. Tom (LT) (talk) 04:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)


 * keep but clean up. I can see Tom (LT)'s concerns, but there's no doubt that a tremendous lot has been published on the links between mental illnesses/conditions and creativity, with lots of speculation about how possible mental issues affected great artists and composers; there's material in books, newspaper articles, all over the place. Inevitably it's all a bit wobbly because it usually involves someone speculating on the mental conditions of a person who died many years previously, carrying out a diagnosis that would normally require a living patient in the same room as a doctor. But the material is there, and society has a legitimate interest in such questions. This isn't a case for TNT. The article has a lot of usable references and quite a lot of helpful discussion of whether the phenomenon is correct, or which way the cause-and-effect go. Incidentally, I don't think all the medical-citation-needed, and unreliable-medical-citation tags are helpful; this is an area where medical research escapes into historical research and general interest. Elemimele (talk) 06:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The connection was widely debated and investigated, as reflected in scientific publications and books, , . My very best wishes (talk) 02:01, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep This is plainly not a topic invented by a Wikipedian. If one searches for "Creativity and mental" on google scholar, there are hundreds if not thousands of articles discussing creativity and mental health/illness/disorders. There is a chapter on it ("Creativity and mental illness") in the Cambridge Handbook of Creativity, one of the basic go-to texts for learning about creativity scholarship. The article as it stands has dozens of references to published research. Deletion is done according to WP:DEL-REASON, not the quality of the text at any time. None of the criteria there are met. It's not even clear what the WP:OR claim is, as the article is well-referenced. I don't see any evidence of WP:SYNTH either. OsFish (talk) 16:47, 15 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.