Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Writing about Writing

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. Tone 18:13, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about Writing[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)

no notability in significant journals Wqwt (talk) 06:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 13:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Books-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 13:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article is firmly based on WP:RS, which includes a "significant journal" (on the topic area, of course). In addition, a simple search yields hundreds of more RS: scholar, books, news. I am wondering what is this article doing in AfD? Rather than deleting, we should want to improve it-- although compared to many others that land in this place, this article is above average. Caballero/Historiador^⎌ 02:46, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the mentions in google news and google books are using the topic in a general sense. In fact I think most mentions in google scholar aren't about what this article is about. Wqwt (talk) 07:31, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wqwt: The article germinated out of a course project with a narrow focus on academic and college writing, and has received little help since. Its limitations should not be a cause for deletion. The article centers around the individuals (Elizabeth Wardle and Douglas Downs) who have developed that specific pedagogical approach (theory or method). The sources include various renowned journals, but most are primary sources. In general, the references are outdated. You would find new and secondary RS in the links I provided. For example, Gordon Johnson, Bommarito & Chappelow; and Méndez. There are dissertations (De Piero) and books, like Lockhard's that seeks to bring this approach to teaching in prisons. But even in academic writing, Writing about Writing is more than Wardle and Downs' "method or theory of teaching composition," as this book shows. Outside of academic writing, it is also a trendy form of literature that transcends the classroom. Its narrow focus may have been what sparked your concern. Caballero/Historiador^⎌ 12:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Caballero1967. James500 (talk) 01:34, 23 October 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.