Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interhemispheric foreign language learning


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Interhemispheric foreign language learning

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This appears to be original research, based on this paper by Prof. Ludger Schiffler. I found a few mentions of this paper, especially under the German title of "Fremdsprachen effektiver lehren und lernen", but I didn't find any substantial coverage. The references in the article appear to be either about something else (Rizzolatti 2003; McGuire 1997), to be primary sources (Schiffler 2002; Schiffler 2003), or to be such vague citations as to not be useful (Macedonia 2004; Baur 1991). The Baur book was also published before the Schiffler paper, so logically it can't contain coverage of the subject. To sum up, I can't find any evidence that the subject passes the general notability guideline. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour  ♪ talk ♪ 07:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour  ♪ talk ♪ 07:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour  ♪ talk ♪ 07:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete as a non-notable theory or technique. Several of the reference cited are not related to interhemispheric language learning, but are about language and cognition generally and used here to synthesize support for the technique. A quick search of journal databases revealed nothing in English about this technique or theory. A search using key words such as 'Interhemisphaerisches' and 'Fremdsprachen' found a handful of research articles, but from their abstracts they appear to be general work in psycholinguistics not directly related to this topic (though I am not a very confident reader of German). Cnilep (talk) 01:10, 4 February 2013 (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.