Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filipino American Identity Development


 * 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 ~ trialsanderrors 05:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Filipino American Identity Development

 * — (View AfD)

Article is a personal essay and intrinsically OR. A ecis  Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 15:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This is NOT original research. The model was published in the Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development in January 2004.
 * It is VERY important that this type of information is available for the general public and not just in academia, which is why it should be available on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HotBachelor (talk • contribs)
 * In that case it is primary thought and original research, and on top of that probably copyrighted. A  ecis  Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 15:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. A summary of a not-especially-notable journal article isn't encyclopedic. Geoffrey Spear 16:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,


 * Delete - original research. I had a look at the paper in question, the article is not a copyvio. MER-C 03:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per MER-C and nom. Big  top  04:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I could't access the actual journal article this was based on, but on the talk page the article creator admits it's a paraphrase of the journal article only. WP:OR - you can use the article as a citation when writing another article about the topic (assuming the topic warrants an encyclopedia article, which is not readily evident) - but you can't just post the journal article itself or a paraphrase of it. --Krich (talk) 04:09, 21 December 2006 (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.