Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medical model

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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Medical model[edit]

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

Conscientious editors tagged this article for cleanup almost six (6) years ago, yet the problems remain. Editors who have posted comments on the Talk page describe many of the problems. A quick summary: The article is rife with bias, misinformation, undue emphasis, errors, poor organization, and a paucity of references to support its editorial comments. At best, visitors seeking information on the medical model leave befuddled rather than enlightened. At worst, they depart the page armed with fallacious 'facts' and biased beliefs. Mark D Worthen PsyD 21:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Many of the comments on the talk page describe the article as poor but acknowledge that it does represent a view of psychiatry that is historically notable. It should be improved not deleted. Lumos3 (talk) 23:14, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:Deletion is not cleanup. I agree that it's a bit of a mess: WP:SOFIXIT. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see what y'all are saying and I appreciate the feedback from more experienced editors. I'll add this article to my "to do" list. :o) Mark D Worthen PsyD 02:10, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Important topic; further develop, per comments above. DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:38, 5 January 2014 (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.