Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structural stage 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 redirect‎ to Piaget's theory of cognitive development. ✗plicit 06:35, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Structural stage theory[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The concept of a "structural stage theory" is only mentioned on JSTOR a total of 6 times, all to do with Piaget's theory. This article should be deleted per WP:SIGCOV, as it appears to be trying to generalize the concept to promote the WP:FRINGE theories of Ken Wilber - car chasm (talk) 04:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Psychology. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Piaget's theory of cognitive development - There does seem to be some coverage in reliable sources of this concept but almost all in relation to Piaget's theory of cognitive development (eg. [1], [2], [3], [4]). The present article appears to be trying to discuss this concept as a broader academic idea but I don't see the reliable sources to support this. In order to do this, we'd need reliable sources which explicitly discuss Piaget's theory in relation to the others mentioned here and call this collection of ideas "structural stage theory". In the article, there is one source from Piaget and then two sources which do not appear to use the phrase "structural stage theory" (and one of those is an unpublished masters dissertation). Thus this article appears to violate WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, and WP:NOTESSAY. WJ94 (talk) 09:32, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above, this is not independently notable but is worth a redirect and possibly a very brief mention at the target article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:21, 12 May 2023 (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.