Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural sensibility

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. Sandstein 09:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural sensibility

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

I'm no deletionist, but this article seems spurious and no high quality research. Refs. given are not really convincing. Artiquities (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The topic seems somewhat fuzzy but it is our policy to persevere rather than delete. The title phrase certainly gets a lots of usage and it's up to us to find the sources which best explain it. Here's an example which demonstrates the notability of the topic: Cultural sensibility. Warden (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Though the article does seem to speak to a cultural ethic that is notable (WP:N ) the authors sources do not provide a link to its relevance to any academic field of study, therefore, I believe it is original research (WP:NOR ). Nor do the references (WP:RS ) or notes provide support for the topic to warrant its inclusion in the Wiki. If there is some linkage between Woody Allen, the environment and cultural sensibility it is not clearly defined by the author. Perhaps with an extensive rework it might comply with (WP:POTENTIAL)--User:Warrior777 (talk) 04:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:16, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as dictionary definition. Not a valid encyclopedic topic. Carrite (talk) 22:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete while I believe this topic may be notable, I don't not believe that any of the provided references are primarily about the topic. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:29, 11 August 2011 (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.