Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scholarly method


 * 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. Clear consensus to keep this, possibly under a different title. The question of renaming/disambiguation can happen on the talk pages. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:38, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Scholarly method

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article doesn't have an sources which address, or even define the topic "scholarly method". If I google the term I get Wikipedia and its mirrors, and various papers describing various methods which happen to be scholarly. Maybe there are sources available but please find them. Chain Suave (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 October 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 22:12, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey I tried, don't blame me Chain Suave (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article is alternatively titled scholarship. That is the very thing that Wikipedia is all about, and if that's not notable we should all give up and go write blogs instead, or else change our definition of notable.  Whole books are written on the subject: Scholarship: Its Meaning and Value, Ancient Greek Scholarship, The Politics and Processes of Scholarship, Medieval and Renaissance Scholarship, and Hebrew Scholarship and the Medieval World. Many books are written on scholarship in specific fields; Design and Scholarship, Scholarship in the Digital Age, Scholarship and Christian Faith, and The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in High.  In fact, there is so much material out there that one article is just not going to be enough to cover it all. SpinningSpark 23:29, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Those books are about "the body of principles and practices used by scholars to make their claims about the world as valid and trustworthy as possible"? Chain Suave (talk) 23:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I do wonder what past account Chain Suave operated under, since Chain Suave is most certainly not a new editor, but scholarship is a WP:Notable topic. Rename the article to "Scholarship" if needed, but WP:AfD is not cleanup. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: We already have a Scholarship article. This article therefore should not have "scholarship" bolded in the lead as a WP:Alternative title. Some merging is perhaps in order. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No, that's wrong, and merging would be highly inappropriate. The scholarship article is about the financial award, not the activity of scholarly investigation.  Bolding the term from an incoming disambiguation link is quite normal. This article could just as well be retitled with a disambiguator such as scholarship (scholarly investigation). SpinningSpark 00:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Correcting ping. SpinningSpark 00:32, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I know what the Scholarship article is about. What it is about does not mean that its format cannot be changed and that both of these topics cannot fit in one article or that this article cannot be merged elsewhere. And, no, "scholarship" should not be bolded as the alternative title in this article. It is not the alternative title and it having that title bolded in the introduction can lead readers and editors to think that "scholarship" redirects here. Yes, the "Not to be confused with Scholasticism, Scholarism, or Scholarship" hatnote is currently there, but still. Were you even aware that "scholarship" is its own Wikipedia article when you made your comment above? It does not seem like it. Furthermore, there are no sources in the article using "scholarship" as the alternative title for "scholarly method." What reliable sources do so? Right now, Wikipedia is defining ""scholarship" in two different ways by having "scholarship" as the alternative title in this article. We can ask about the bolding at the WP:Disambiguation talk page if you like.  Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was aware, and no it is not an appropriate merge. Two topics with the same name is entirely what disambiguation is about and bolding is part of that. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 01:07, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * As seen here here and here, I queried editors at the WP:Disambiguation talk page and WP:Alternative title talk page about weighing in on this. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:37, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Scholarship. The two topics are the same topic.   The bolded "scholarship" in the lede as a WP:Alternative title say this.  NB. This will involve a lot of work, given the very poor state of Scholarship.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:35, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm really at a loss to understand how a merge could ever work here, or why people think they are the same topic. Scholarship is a monetary (or other) award given to students to help them through their studies.  Scholarship, in the sense of this article, is the activity of professional specialists gathering, analysing and disseminating information.  Please explain how those two topics are in any way related, or what the first, defining sentence of the merged article would be. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 11:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I guess I skimmed scholarship way too quick. I was thinking of scholarship#3.  “The activity, methods or attainments of a scholar”.  Clearly, scholarship is ambiguous. I’ve heard of scholarships of course, but always part of a two or more word term, and tending more often to be called a stipend if just one word.  Also “award”s.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, and I have not confused the two topics. I know what a scholarship is. I would state more, but I would be repeating what I stated above. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:39, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Flyer22 Reborn, are you talking to me? Did I accuse you of confusion?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:14, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * SmokeyJoe, I was replying to you and to Spinningspark. You were saying how you heard of scholarships. Spinningspark questioned "why people think [scholarly method and scholarship] are the same topic." I was saying that, like you, I know what a scholarship is and I have not confused the topics. For anyone confusing them, though, if the two terms were not listed as synonyms in the lead of this article, there would be no confusion. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Move Scholarship to Scholarship (financial support), make Scholarship (disambiguation) to point to Scholarly method & Scholarship (financial support). "Scholarship" is an alternative title for this topic and should be bolded in the lede.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:11, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * SmokeyJoe, regarding alternative titles, I'm asking the following: What reliable sources are there stating that "scholarship" is an alternative term for "scholarly method"? That is one reason I object to "scholarship" being bolded in the lead of this article. The other is that "scholarship" is currently a Wikipedia article. "Scholarship" does not redirect here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Didn't SpinningSpark, 23:29, 23 October 2018, give enough sources using "scholarship" in titles, where it is synonymous with scholarly method? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see where his sources state that "scholarship" is an alternative term for "scholarly method." And we can't engage in WP:OR by stating they mean the same thing, whether going by titles or otherwise. Then again, the sources he listed are WP:PAYWALL. But even Googling the two terms together with different phrases such as "also known as," I see no reliable sources stating that they are synonyms. We have Spinningspark saying they are two different topics (which they are when defining "scholarship" the way that the Wikipedia Scholarship article does) and yet wanting the terms presented as synonyms in the lead of this article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course scholarship is synonymous with [use of] the scholarly method. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:16, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * We should not state "also known as" or "or" unless there are reliable sources backing up the statement. Renaming the article and removing "scholarship" unless it's part of the title is the way to go. That, or merging this content elsewhere. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, although perhaps make moves as suggested by User:SmokeyJoe above to clarify naming, perhaps as a direct outcome of this AFD or perhaps by a follow-on wp:RM. The "move" vote by SmokeyJoe should be interpreted as a "Keep" vote, for AFD purposes.  Basically this is clearly a different topic than scholarships as stipends. --Doncram (talk) 19:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, for sure, Keep. Stuff needs fixing, but there is not a case for deletion.  The "scholarly method" of research is notable, SpinningSpark provided overwhelming evidence that "scholarship" is used to name this topic.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep but move Scholarship to Scholarship (financial support), and Scholarly method to Scholarship (methodology), disambiguating the base page name. bd2412  T 01:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.