Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Problem of the criterion


 * 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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Problem of the criterion

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is UNCANNILY, similar to Munchausen’s Trilemma, a much more well written article with better sources, therefore since there is only one reference to a single American Philosopher on the page, also the fact that the philosophical problem is similar to Munchausen's Trilemma, i recommend this page for deletion. --RuleTheWiki (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Logic-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I admit I am somewhat mystified by nom's rationale, for two major reasons. Firstly, the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy devotes a whole article to the topic, with 51 citations. Those include papers not only by Chisholm but one by Amico and one by Fumerton both with the same title, one by Cling "Posing the Problem of the Criterion", DePaul's "The Problem of the Criterion and Coherence Methods in Ethics", and one by Poston "Explanationist Plasticity & The Problem of the Criterion". The topic is therefore certainly notable by WP:GNG. Secondly, I looked at the article pointed to by Munchausen’s Trilemma, and could find there no mention of Chisholm, the Methodist approach, or criterion, though both articles do mention (infinite) regression. The similarity thus appears very slight. The article requires far better citing and discussion of the views of the other philosophers mentioned, but since we know there are multiple reliable sources on the topic, this is an obvious keep. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:46, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Similar concepts, but differing in scope and approach. The two topics are both notable, and both well sourced, independently of each other.  So, keep. Fieari (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep As mentioned above, reliable sources for this do exist. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 03:09, 16 September 2016 (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.