Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dignity (2nd nomination)


 * 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   merge to Human dignity.  MBisanz  talk 03:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Dignity
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There is a better article called Human dignity. This article is just a personal essay. Perhaps the Human dignity article should be moved here. Does dignity apply to anything non-human? Not according to this article. Belasted (talk) 04:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Human dignity since they appear to be one and the same. The suggestion to move that article to the title Dignity appears quite sensible. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 04:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect per nom. as one of the authors who's tried in the past to clean up this page, I'd have suggested the merge myself (if I knew that the other page existed).  I'll check to see if anything should be merged over.  -- Ludwigs 2  04:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge please andycjp (talk) 05:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC) KEEP This is a wonderful, long-standing article that is well supported by the progressive Wikipedia community. 'Human dignity' is mere dogma. Pyrrhon8 (talk) 19:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge or Redirect as proposed. -- Taku (talk) 12:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Human dignity as per Blanchardb. Capitalistroadster (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep This is clearly a merge discussion. (and dignity is not limited to humans as the concept might apply in architecture, say). Colonel Warden (talk) 07:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Human dignity. While it is possible that an article could be created on this topic that is not synonymous with the latter, the current article isn't it -- it is simply a WP:CFORK of 'Human dignity'. If somebody wants to come along and create such a non-synonymous article at some later stage, there is nothing to stop them. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 14:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * maybe we can satisfy both sides (per Belasted, above) by merging the articles and moving the merged version from 'human dignity' to 'dignity'. if we can get a consensus on that, I'll undertake the merge and move.  -- Ludwigs 2  21:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, and based on responses I think it can be done with no controversy. Belasted (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge with Human dignity. — Reinyday, 07:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If you have a comment about putting the section on the German Constitution into the current article:Dignity, please visit Proposal re article:Human Dignity. Pyrrhon8 (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge Arguably this should be merged with human dignity from the standpoint of scholarly philosophy (most scholarly discussions of dignity fall into a sub-set of applied ethics.) Most contemporary philosophic work in dignity considers it to be a human trait or aspect. While many may see this as a blatant example of speciesm, this is not correct. Typically those that do so are using the scholarly definition of dignity incorrectly to represent worth or value. Dignity is recognized as separate from these and stands on its own as human characteristic not unlike grace. Often dignity is expressed as ideas such as 'calmness under suffering' and has many sociological crossovers in public behavior and displayed social norms. See the work of Bontekoe, Coope, Pritchard, Malby, Christiansen, Kolnai, Laird, Quinn, and Morris.Coreddrgn (talk) 22:04, 4 March 2009 (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.