Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Psychology
 | Points of interest related to Psychology on Wikipedia: History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – Style |
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:
- Edit this page 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.
- 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:| watch |
See also: Behavioural science-related deletions
Psychology
[edit]- Strengths and weaknesses (personality) (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)
Essay - Altenmann >talk 23:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It is indeed a WP:ESSAY and therefore fails the second test of WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tale of the Tribe (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)
Fails WP:NBOOK. Unpublished books can be notable, but I could barely find any coverage of this book during WP:BEFORE. Astaire (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Literature, Philosophy, Spirituality, and Psychology. Astaire (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Both of the current sources are listed as unreliable on WP:RSPS. I can't find anything reliable enough to even mention in Robert Anton Wilson that he was working on this book before his death. hinnk (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Bert Hellinger (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)
Fails WP:BIO, WP:NACADEMIC, etc. I see no real argument for notability. Text is plainly WP:PROMOTIONAL. See related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family Constellations jps (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Psychology and South Africa. jps (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Family Constellations (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)
It has been some time since I have seen an article so thin as this. An amalgamation of a lot of ideas of Bert Hellinger who may be notable in his own right (edit: I decided that he is not notable either: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bert Hellinger) but this idea of his seems to have generated very little interest and notice beyond the typical "don't fall for scams" notes and some poorly-considered publications with basically no citations. If we were to remove all the WP:CRUFT, we would be left with a simple statement that "Family Constellations is Bert Hellinger's attempt to do therapy." That's all that I can see sourced properly. Not suitable for Wikipedia. jps (talk) 22:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Psychiatry, Psychology, and South Africa. jps (talk) 22:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strengths test (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)
This reads as an advert hiding as an article. It is only about one product, and I do not see this as a neutral article that should be in Wikipedia. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Psychology. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Obvious advertising, poor sourcing. -- asilvering (talk) 04:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely not a purpose to advertise. Tried to be as honest and objective as possible. Don't have any affiliation with them. For the sources, I followed a reliable list for guidance to add relative and reputable sources. ScirIvan (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ScirIvan, the sources are things like "18 Free and Paid Personality Tests To Find Your Career Fit". These aren't reliable sources. The kind of thing we'd be looking for with this is academic sources discussing the test or the use of the test. -- asilvering (talk) 14:50, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely not a purpose to advertise. Tried to be as honest and objective as possible. Don't have any affiliation with them. For the sources, I followed a reliable list for guidance to add relative and reputable sources. ScirIvan (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to personality test. High5 Test is the correct name of the subject of the article, and "Strengths test" could refer to CliftonStrengths, Strength Deployment Inventory or other similarly named assessments. The available coverage does not indicate that the High5 Test is notable in itself. There is scholarly discussion of a "high five model" (Cosentino and Solano, Quito-Calle and Cosentino, de la Iglesia and Solano), but there is no evidence that this discussion is of the High5 Test/High5 Strengths Test. Some promotional coverage like the Indeed sponcon mentioned above; some potentially fringe coverage in PositivePsychology.com but it's more of a WP:TRIVIALMENTION. Book results are also trivial, passing mentions. So I don't think the subject matter is notable but there's a case to redirect the title. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there any more support for a Redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as independent notability not established. Citations included appear to be mostly listicles and pay-for-play content. I see no reason to redirect since I don't think "strengths test" is a particularly common search term (and it doesn't seem to be a big target from the article stats). jps (talk) 23:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Proposed deletions
[edit]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.