Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Language personality theory
- 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. --Coredesat 01:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Language personality theory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Article does not provide any significant sources or assert notability. Also suspected WP:COI, as the only other articles edited by the creator were references to this theory and the username is the same (Sergey). The addition to Personality psychology was deleted very quickly, the other was in a Further reading section, so it may have escaped notice. The talk page contains another editor's unfavorable comments as well. Clarityfiend 23:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Fails WP:Original Research Corpx 23:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The subject may be notable, but the page as it stands appears to be a copyright violation. If we recreate this later, let's not violate copyright. Antelan talk 00:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — Given previous problems with articles on personality theories, I think it is not too much to ask that they cite an external work (other than that of the theory's discoverer). This one doesn't. Cedars 01:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 05:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -- per nom. Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete-- besides being drawn straight from the website, this article doesn't do anything to explain the subject. Encylopedias operate at different levels, but one purpose is to leave the reader understanding more than they knew before they started reading. This fails that standard. Mandsford 13:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Sergey V. Golubkov (which needs to be written first...), he seems like a notable scholar and his theory can be described in his bio article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:40, 26 June 2007 (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.