Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teachable moment


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Teachable moment

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was created in response to the Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy about President Obama's phrase to describe that incident - a "teachable moment". The only source given in the article that actually discusses the etymology of the phrase (as opposed to merely using it) is from a letter to the editor. I cannot fathom a reason that this would be remotely considered an appropriate topic. B (talk) 04:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there's an argument to be made that undue weight is given to the phrase's use in the Gates arrest controversy, but this appears to me a fairly well-sourced, semi-interesting article. The source to Robert J. Havighurst's book is fairly convincing that the phrase has something like notability outside of the Gates controversy -- and, indeed, that it could/should be treated less as a phrase and more as a concept. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  05:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I cannot see a single reason why this is an inappropriate topic for an encyclopedia article. (Or, for that matter, why this is considered a language-related deletion discussion - simply because the article title is a phrase?) Angr (talk) 17:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, looking at this again, that's kind of a significant point. This is a concept, not a phrase; we don't need etymology. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  17:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, but slim down the political stuff; that's definitely undue weight. Nothing wrong with having the rest of the present article standing alone.  Nyttend (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a notable topic, and as a bonus some (but admittedly not all) cited references are appropriate secondary sources. I don't agree that the Gates arrest controversy is the "main" political use, and I don't get what that "Pragmatic use" section is supposed to mean, but that's clean-up. Cnilep (talk) 03:00, 17 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.