Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progressive Utilization 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 speedy keep. withdrawn DGG ( talk ) 23:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Utilization Theory[edit]

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

Promotional article for what is admitted in the article itself to be a fringe theory. Efforts to reduce it to an encyclopedic article or even more it as promotional have failed. Article consists of a series of promotional quotations, embedded in explanations of it from its own publishing house. The theory name is repeated in the article as often as possible; so is the name of its founder--that's a reliable hallmark of promotionalism. The article admits most criticism is negative, but 90% of what is included is positive. The theory may well be slightly notable, but NOT ADVOCACY is a basic principle which we should not compromise. There is no need to merge with the founder, as it is already covered adequately in the enthusiastic article on Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, which might also merit some attention. DGG ( talk ) 05:52, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article is in bad shape and needs to be trimmed down a lot. Actually there is one user that has bulked the article out a lot, @Maheśvara:, see contributions Special:Contributions/Maheśvara. The article before was still in poor shape, but a lot shorter [revision circa August 2017]. Having said this, I believe the article is notable and the material better handled in a separate article rather than being inserted into Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that mightbe a possible solution. Will you watch it? DGG ( talk ) 18:15, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added it to my watchlist. I've started trimming it down, will continue when I get more time. Jonpatterns (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2018 (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.