Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deliberative

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 no consensus. Black Kite (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deliberative

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

I originally considered this as a good candidate for a redirect over to rhetoric (as this article is actually about deliberative rhetoric) but upon review, it doesn't seem like this would be an obvious redirect. The article itself doesn't discuss too much that wouldn't be covered under rhetoric and seems more like original research than an article. Sasquatch t|c 01:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/merge per our editing policy. There are multiple pages covering this ground including rhetoric (Aristotle), deliberation and deliberative assembly. Warden (talk) 17:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 01:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/merge there must be a way to compile any useful information into a more encompassing article.--DrumstickJuggler (talk) 01:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak delete~~. Although there may be call for an article on deliberative rhetoric, I'm not convinced that this article moves in that direction. Perhaps some parts of it are worth merging elsewhere. The first sentence of the lead defines deliberative rhetoric, but most of the rest of the article is about sections of Aristotle's Rhetoric and later philosophical commentary on that book. It might be useful to merge bits of the article to Rhetoric (Aristotle) and perhaps a few sentences to Deliberation, notwithstanding the pains taken to argue that the article is not about deliberation per se. I think, contra Colonel Warden, that the existence of multiple article on distinct concepts that partially overlap ideas described in this article is a reason to delete, not to keep the article. It is an essay synthesizing ideas from philosophy, politics, and rhetoric to explore ideas. This is a worthwhile thing to do, but not an aim of Wikipedia. Cnilep (talk) 02:49, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps the best way to handle this would be to split it apart, with the commentary on Arisotle's Rhetoric merged to that page, and the parts on deliberative rhetoric kept and moved to that title, as suggested by Ansh666 and Nyttend, below. Cnilep (talk) 04:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If consensus is to keep, maybe move to Deliberative rhetoric to avoid confusion. Ansh666 03:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move per Ansh, or disambiguate. If we find it acceptable, keep it. If not, there are several places to which the title could reasonably redirected, and that's precisely the reason we have disambiguation pages. Nyttend (talk) 03:09, 2 May 2013 (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.