Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Security and Development

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Security and Development[edit]

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

WP:NEO, looks like WP:OR or WP:ESSAY — Timneu22 · talk 20:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete, security and development is an emerging field of study (as is Human Security, Human Rights, etc), the article contains numerous references to well recognized research and websites that discuss the issue, this is an encyclopedia quality article. User: hsutton521 17:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unreferenced essay, not an encyclopedia article. Yworo (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ESSAY. THF (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is basically an opinion piece and should be deleted per WP:OR. Peacock (talk) 21:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been updated to include references; what are the next steps in making sure it doesnt get deleted? -g323, not so wikipedia savvy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by G323 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello, you need to read WP:OR. Wikipedia does not accept "original research" which includes the synthesis of other material to create a new theory. So, references alone will not solve the problem. QU ^TalkQu 21:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hi - thank you for your response. This is not original research. There is a wide body of research on Security and development. I am very confused by this whole process. How can I prove that this is not original research if not by providing references? The whole code/citation system is very conplex. Thank you for your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by G323 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anything else that should be done at this point to remove the deletion warning? I believe it has been establish that:
1. This is not an essay
2. This is not a "term"
3. This is not an opinion piece
4. This is not original research
5. It is indeed an encyclopedia article.
Can we please remove the deletion tab? I appreciate and look forward to your feedback - g323 —Preceding unsigned comment added by G323 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No. Wait for the AfD to end. — Timneu22 · talk 00:43, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not WP:OR or WP:ESSAY, this is not original research nor and essay, please see discussion of the topic by well recognized and reliable sources such as: EU on Security and Development http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.aspx?id=1659&lang=en , DIFID on Security and Development http://sand.miis.edu/research/documents/SecandDevdocs/securityforall.pdf , International Peace Academy on Security and Development http://www.un.org/esa/peacebuilding/Library/Strengthening_SecDev_Nexus_IPA.pdf, CISDE on Security and Development http://www.cidse.org/Area_of_work/Global_governance/?id=309, Monterey Institute of International Studies Security and Development program http://sand.miis.edu/ User: hsutton521 17:35, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Those all seem to be primary sources. Can you provide any secondary sources reporting on the topic? Yworo (talk) 04:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The accusations seem to include bad faith and make no sense, as some editors have pointed out earlier in this afd. Longevitydude (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge This article is muddled and conflates several concepts within the field of security studies. "Security and Development" is not a paradigm (such as Democratic Peace Theory), nor is it a separate field of study (such as Human Rights or Sustainable Development). While I applaud the author's efforts, most of this article probably belongs in a different article, such as securitization (international relations), as an example of the securitization of economic development or sustainable development. To call this WP:OR might even be a stretch, as has already been pointed out, since there are no secondary references or general textbooks that feature "Security and Development" as an emerging paradigm of security studies.99.137.202.91 (talk) 21:23, 19 November 2010 (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.