Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journalism and public intellectuals

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 delete. Stifle (talk) 08:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Journalism and public intellectuals

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is not a notable topic. The article is merely an essay which rambles from Plato to Intelligent Design to Marx. Northwestgnome (talk) 06:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think it's fairly well sourced. The idea itself seems to exist and referenced by different publishers. I also find it to be an interesting connection between two concepts. Perhaps it's not sufficiently developed and needs more work, but I'd like to see it stay. Chaldor (talk) 08:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem that I see is that the sources provide information about intellectuals, but not about their relationship to journalism. Northwestgnome (talk) 16:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about that? Refs 4 & 6 seem to address both ideas together. I can't read ref 1, 2, 3, or 5; but I'm willing to assume good faith based on what I saw in Refs 4 & 6. Chaldor (talk) 20:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 4 says that journalists and intellectuals are both affected by modern celebrity culture, ref 6 says Karl Marx was both a journalist and an intellectual. I don't think that is enough to write an article. (Refs 1 and 2 are about the Ancient Greeks, ref 3 is about the Intelligent Design movement, ref 5 is a general observation about intellectuals.) Northwestgnome (talk) 21:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, looks like a rambling essay to me. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 01:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It rambles, but worse, it's not even half-finished. One or two historical facts are pulled from the shelves without an explanation why those are picked, and the rest forgotten. I mean, why bring up Gutenberg and not the 'invention' of the actual newspaper, or 17th and 18th century pamphlets, or computers, or the internet? This was written as a class assignment, it seems to me. Drmies (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - interesting premise, but this brief slide around history is not. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:47, 10 October 2008 (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.