Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyclic history


 * 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 and redirect to Social cycle theory. Consensus to delete, the redirect is an editorial action.  Sandstein  08:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Cyclic history

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has multiple issues. In as much as the subject is notable and verifiable, it is addressed in such articles as Social cycle theory, Law of Social Cycle, and Hindu units of time. Throughout its long existence, the Cyclic history article has consisted of what appears as a combination of original research and vague, mostly uncited references to the non-mainstream speculations of others. I cannot see how to salvage it without essentially duplicating existing material from some of the aforementioned alternative articles, or at best strongly overlapping with one or more of their respective subject areas. Robin S (talk) 02:42, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  08:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: I agree, there really is nothing here worth salvaging. I looked at Social cycle theory which has a 'see also' list: I think I will remove this from the list, since it serves no purpose, and touch up the others: some are very specific topics, which need clarification. Imaginatorium (talk) 09:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * DElete -- I am far from sure we should have this at all, but if we do, it should be Cyclicism in history. D H Lawrence and Gandhi are hardly major historians.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Social cycle theory, which is not quite the same thing as what looks like the originally intended topic but is close enough - broadly, Social cycle theory is treating this as a primarily sociological theory while this was apparently viewing it a grand historical theory. The theory was never particularly popular among academic historians, but (for a generation or two after Oswald Spenglier) it had a lot of appeal to the general public. PWilkinson (talk) 23:01, 13 March 2016 (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.