Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus. bainer (talk) 12:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument
Not notable, borderline advertisement. Google yeilds almost 10K results, but nothing that indicates anything more than aggressive promotion. Although this isn't an article for the website per se, it's instructive that its Alexa is almost 1M. I recomend deletion. - brenneman (t) (c)  13:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as advertisement. Jasmol 00:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If it's advertisement, it's poorly done. And I don't think it is - for one, the article doesn't use the HBDI lingo. For example, they don't refer to the four thinking styles with specific words ("analytical", "sequential", "interpersonal", "imaginative" in the article) - one of the main differences between the HBDI and other tests like it is that the HBDI doesn't categorize you in a list of set types. Where the MBTI tells me I'm an ENFP, the HBDI merely rates rates me in its four thinking style categories. And there's no pre-defined sum of the four ratings. If you're questioning the validity of having an article on the HBDI at all, I think that should be a clear yes. It's used by some pretty serious people, and I don't think it's a fluke. I work for one of the largest corporations in my country and was HBDI-tested as part of a managerial training programme. I would improve the article and link it to other articles on personality psychology and test systems. Carcajou 15:02, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I've reinserted some critiques of the system, to get it closer to NPOV and be less of advertisment. I think it is notable for two reasons, 1) many people have been tested using the instrument, 2) it is one approach to an ongoing investigation into personalities and learning styles so it has historical significance. I agree the article needs more work. (I'm original creator of article, and have no connection to hbdi.com) --Pfafrich 16:20, 5 December 2005 (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.