Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassandra paradox

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 redirect to Cassandra (metaphor). L Faraone 04:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cassandra paradox[edit]

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

If you google "Cassandra paradox", you'll see that the term means different things to different people. As described in this article, it bears a strong resemblance to a self-fulfilling prophecy, but in the article's single source, it seems to be another name for the Hawthorne effect. This source defines it as something akin to a self-defeating prophecy, and this one invokes it while discussing the problem of evil. And so forth. The bottom line is that this particular definition of the term isn't notable, and nor are any of the others. Given that there's such disagreement over what the Cassandra paradox actually is, I think outright deletion would be more appropriate than a merge or redirect to another article. DoctorKubla (talk) 17:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. czar · · 17:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: perhaps a variant of Cassandra (metaphor)? Praemonitus (talk) 00:03, 25 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, Mediran (t • c) 01:43, 1 May 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, czar · · 01:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as a clear violation of WP:NPOV, if not also of WP:OR and WP:N. The single source is insufficient and unbalanced, and as nom indicates, if we were to remove the POV elements in this article, there'd be nothing left. It's basically an Internet pop culture bandwagon, full of sound and fury, signifying ... nothing. It can't be made into a good article because other sources mean different things by the term so it would become a ragbag of unrelated materials. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Chiswick Chap. As about scholarly use, it is not consistent with the article, where most uses of "Cassandra paradox" are synonyms of Cassandra effect, not its contrapositive.Truth or consequences-2 (talk) 13:22, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cassandra (metaphor). There doesn't seem a single definition of what this means, and if none of the senses are notable then the article should be deleted. Cassandra (metaphor) lists various Cassandra-related terms and concepts and might be of some use to interested readers. (It might be possible to merge some content.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cassandra (metaphor) which appears to cover the subject well. Doctorhawkes (talk) 05:26, 15 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.