Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technicism

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. clear consrnsus DGG ( talk ) 08:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Technicism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article is an attempt to discuss left-wing technocracy, but this is not supported by the sources. Although the term has been used, it has been as a synonym for technocracy (sometimes, but not always, implying a critical standpoint) and not specifically a left-wing incarnation of it.

The current content replaced earlier content which was an attempt to define the term, but was short and entirely unreferenced and so not worth reverting to. Unless it can be shown that this phrase is commonly used to refer to the purported subject of the article, it should be deleted and probably a redirect to technocracy put in its place. Warofdreams talk 23:21, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:02, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Warofdreams: I respectfully disagree with this proposal for deletion in that deletion of this article would seem a bit extreme for a solution that could be better obtained through many edits to better fit the Sources. Either that, or someone could provide more evidence for the claim of this article. However, the argument regarding the similarity to Technocracy still remains valid, so maybe it could be considered for a merging with Technicism? Even if all of these suggestions prove to be unsuccessful, there still would be a lack of an article to accurately describe this Political philosophy. I do think that at least one of these possible solutions could be an accurate substitue for deletion, and I would hope that it is more than just me who thinks so. Учхљёная (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but it needs a lot of edits to improve it to a satisfactory level.--Darrelljon (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this is original research as written, this isn't a commonly used term. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep although many things may need to be reverted, it still is a term with active connotations. Please consider at least a merging with Technocracy. Thank you. User:Учхљёная ^{(talk,philosophy,edits)} 02:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. The article is bad (poorly referenced), but the term appears notable. I don't think this warrants WP:TNT by deletion, but I would not object to anyone gutting most of the content before a rewrite at some point. Till then... this doesn't seem incorrect, does it? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment unilke many AfD discussions, this is one where it I feel it should be kept if and only if two reliable sources are presented. Right now it has one source that looks to have some level of reliability [1], and the images on the page appear to have no references at all. Power~enwiki (talk) 07:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Although the word "Technicism" has been used in other contexts, the author of this entry is using it to describe an alleged Left-wing or Communist tendency that does not exist with such a label. The closest concept that does exist is Alexander Bogdanov's Tektology and even this, although within the history of Communism, would not be identified as an operative tendency or movement. Otherwise what the entry describes is subsumed within the concept and movement known as Technocracy movement.LAWinans (talk) 03:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. It's a violation of WP:NOTESSAY and WP:OR. The lack of WP:RS is masked by the adoption of neologism that has been independently coined and used in many different contexts to refer to different things. - GretLomborg (talk) 04:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: WP:NOR and WP:NOTNEO apply here. DrStrauss talk 06:48, 28 June 2017 (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.