Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pseudorationalism


 * 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   no consensus. Completely rewritten, no consensus to delete in this version owing to very little discussion.  Sandstein  20:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Pseudorationalism

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article is an unsalvageable hodge-podge of POV pushing and coatracking. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, this is not a meaningful concept, just a synthesis of numerous pieces from not particularly reliable sources that happen to share a pejorative. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Support [deletion] per nom. I originally prodded this article last week based upon it being an obscure concept with little in the way of reliable sources, but didn't get round to moving it here after it was contested - by a now blocked user. QueenCake (talk) 23:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Support deletion, per nomination. BrideOfKripkenstein (talk) 15:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete unsalvageable as nom says. Whether it's quite a neologism or not, there's nothing substantial here, just POV dressed up with a few unsatisfactory references. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:33, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - as a dictionary definition doing the lambada with an original essay. Carrite (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will stand down owing to the article's second life with new content. The 1935 article definitely exists, using the German for "Pseudorationalism" in the title, which would imply a keep is on the way. I'm not sure the content here is particularly useful, but that's ultimately an editing matter. Carrite (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment FWIW, I blocked the sock who created this article--he has a history of creating poorly sourced articles on neologisms and the like. But the article has been completely rewritten so everyone who !voted above might want to take a second look. I'm not qualified to assess the references used but at first glance the article seems much improved and lambada-free. Valfontis (talk) 21:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted after a complete rewrite to generate a discussion on the new version. 23:14, February 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep as rewritten. After the AfD was largely decided, another editor rewrote the article into an entirely different (and reasonably sourced) topic. My initial intention was to close as inapplicable on that basis, but I welcome evaluation of the material as rewritten. Cheers! bd2412  T 23:21, 12 February 2012 (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.