Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phenomenology (science)


 * 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. There's clear consensus that the current article should not continue to exist. Beyond that, there's no real consensus on whether delete, TNT, or redirect is the right thing. I'm going to just delete the current article. The title's not protected, so if anybody wants to take another shot at writing this, they can do that without any further action (i.e. no need to drag this to DRV if all you want to do is create a new version). It doesn't seem like Phenomenology (science) would be a likely search term, so redirect isn't, IMHO, a viable alternative. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Phenomenology (science)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It appears that the topic of this article is original research. As far as I understand there are multiply definition and usage of the term "phenomenology", however no source list some universal definition for "Phenomenology in (any) science". There are articles about Phenomenology in different fields but this particular one is just OR Dima io 20:43, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Phenomenology is an important part of the scientific method. There's an entire section of arxiv devoted to high energy physics phenomenology. "Phenomenology" also gets 6000 hits in PubMed, indicating that it's used in biology. Many of these papers are categorized as phenomenology because they attempt to translate theory into testable experimental predictions.AliceIngvild94 (talk) 21:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Maybe: The article is inaccurate and doesn't cite its sources very well. Phenomenology is a bunch of different things. The usage of the term in physics might be as offered in the article, but that's not "science": that's physics. Phenomenology has all sorts of implications in all sorts of sciences, of course, and Hegel's Phenomenology challenges the primacy of naive sense judgments. However, we're back to asking whether or not it's Wikipedia's job to duplicate or surpass the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or a purely philosophical reference site. If this article were written with exquisite care, great length, and hung off of Phenomenology, it could work, but it might still be questionable. Lean delete. Hithladaeus (talk) 02:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:TNT. I'm not sure if this is a viable cohesive topic or just a loosely related collection of usages in different subfields. (I know what it means in mine, but....) I am sure that the current article is not useful, and with so much of the article text made up of a long quote - from Merriam-Webster, of all things! - really shouldn't be here. Opabinia regalis (talk) 04:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Phenomenology, a disambiguation page that includes the notable and specific scientific meanings (particle physics and psychology) without being just a vague dictionary definition. I don't think these topics are similar enough for a broad umbrella article such as this one to make sense. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 03:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Phenomenology via Mz7 arguments Shad Innet (talk) 06:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think too many people will search for "Phenomenology (science)" instead of Phenomenology.--Dima io 13:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dima io (talk • contribs)
 * TNT - I don't see why redirecting is a good idea, since it's just a DAB. According to the introduction, this article is essentially about the phenomenology of philosophy, which already exists at Phenomenology (philosophy)! But I do believe it is a real topic so something should recreate it. Can be redlinked on the DAB. —Мандичка YO 😜 09:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. Ok, then rewrite of the phenomenology of philosophy or Delete Shad Innet (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Currently the article is almost fork of Phenomenology (philosophy)Dima io 12:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dima io (talk • contribs)


 * Delete or Redirect to Phenomenology. --I am One of Many (talk) 07:05, 22 June 2015 (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.