Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Formal axiology


 * 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 with minimal prejudice against recreation of a reliably sourced, well-written article. I will be happy to userfy this if anyone else wants to work on it. JoshuaZ 01:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Formal axiology

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * deleteno original research, likely wp:coi, and pov problems, beyond which it is hard to say whether or not there is even anything going on in the field with a total of 81 hits on google scholar, so notability is questionable. indeed, to me this looks like a debate based on one scholar reframing another scholars ideas. Buridan 21:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * rewrite - seems like a valid topic, but poorly written. Linked to axiology page.Guroadrunner 22:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * comment what do you mean by valid? if it was a cleanup candidate, i'd have marked it as cleanup.  i'm not sure where valid falls in wikipedia though?  could you elaborate? --Buridan 03:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete checking Google, it appears to be OR, not a notable theory. JJL 02:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletions.   --   &rArr; bsnowball  15:18, 15 June 2007 (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.