Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural artifact

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. Jclemens (talk) 03:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural artifact (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Completely unsourced (the one external link doesn't cover this), and has been for two years, despite being tagged. ╟─TreasuryTag►Tellers' wands─╢ 20:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Theleftorium 21:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Why? It's nothing to do with television... ╟─TreasuryTag►assemblyman─╢ 21:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  My mistake. I must have pressed the wrong button. :) Theleftorium 14:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It's a neglected stub. That alone doesn't warrant deletion; if someone finds it and takes care of it, great. For now, there's nothing contentious about it, the term itself is worthy of an article, and it has the potential to one day become a better article. Seb az86556 (talk) 16:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, dammit. AfD is a seriously flawed process, if this sort of stuff can show up. Makes me wonder what gets through Speedy...1,040 Google Books hits for the exact phrase "Cultural artifact". A term used throughout the entire social science spectrum from archaeology to psychology, but more widely used in the sciences noted in the article. (anthropology: Richard J. Watts. The pragmalinguistic analysis of narrative texts. ethnology: Rob Amery. Warrabarna Kaurna!. and sociology: Mary Gauvain. The social context of cognitive development.) 'Cultural artifact' as scientific terminology is over 60 years old, as a Google scholar search for the exact term used between the years 1942 and 1955 shows. Anarchangel (talk) 09:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 23:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.