Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Psychology

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Psychology. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Psychology|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Psychology. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Science.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

See also: Behavioural science-related deletions


Psychology

Health Dynamics Inventory

Health Dynamics Inventory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable medical tool. The inventors of this procedure appear to have copy-pasted promotional material onto Wikipedia, and even left their contact information at the bottom. It remains without secondary sourcing 14 years later. All the sigcov listed is self-published by the authors. Jdcooper (talk) 02:44, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Social thinking

Social thinking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The majority of this article is promotional content written by someone who works at Teach Social: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pjc5316. See https://teachsocial.org/contact/ or https://x.com/socialthinking/status/1403139072218963970

The second main editor also does as stated by their page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Susanr714

The rest are mostly IPs

So obviously this article read more like an ad, and furthermore it is very POV (despite the "Social thinking" methodology being of the type of intervention that is VERY controversial). The relevance to Wikipedia is also questionable... I am adding appropriate templates and proposing a deletion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 December 23. 149.154.210.208 (talk) 09:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Completing nomination on behalf of IP nominator--above text is copied from the article's talk page. I have no opinion of my own at this time. --Finngall talk 17:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep/Draftify As per [1], some argue its a fringe pseudoscience theory that never gained traction. a response paper [2] argues its not. There is some literature about this article on Google Scholar that might indicate notability, but i'm counting only 2,500 journal articles for the search "social thinking" autism, which is not much. The current article is definitely insanely promotional and has large portions of unreferenced material that reads more like essay than anything else. However, the concept, though controversial, seems notable at least. If the article is kept, it will need significant work. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 19:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inequality by Design

Inequality by Design (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced article that furthermore does not even seem to reflect the book's actual content. The notability of this minor book (which is just one of multiple such books with an article here!) discussing The Bell Curve is also questionable. Lamptonian (talk) 14:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep several reviews are in the further reading, off of which this already passes NBOOK. I'm not even going to bother looking for more but I would bet there are - it is not "completely unsourced". PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

An automatically generated list of proposed deletions and other psychology-related article alerts can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology/Article alerts

No articles proposed for deletion at this time.

Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Psychology