Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethocentric

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ethocentric[edit]

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

Contested PROD; unreferenced apparent neologism. Feezo (Talk) 06:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Dictdef. —Lowellian (reply) 10:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even if "ethocentric" was an established word it still shouldn't have an article by "WP is not a dictionary." The concept should probably be a section in Ethics, like "Ethics in society" or something like that. Kitfoxxe (talk) 10:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'd suggest redirecting this to ethnocentrism as a plausible misspelling. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so too at first, but there are enough hits for "ethocentric" at Google Books[1] and Scholar[2] to suggest that this is a real, if jargonistic, word, used notably by the philosopher Philip Pettit and used by others as well. Here's one explanation of the word, from a journal called Inquiry, that describes Pettit's "non-sceptical solution called the ethocentric account of rule-following, because it is based upon the habits of response and the practices of negotiation that make up the ethos of the subjects involved."[3] --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Kitfoxxe. GoogolplexForce (talk) 17:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - dictionary definition of obscure neologism. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:58, 17 March 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.