Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triple Task Method
- 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. Courcelles (talk) 23:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- Triple Task Method (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about research method solely based on book sources of the two original researchers. Without any 3rd party sources this looks like a self-presentation of this research approach from a possible COI-editor (SPA). Google search revealed no in-depth coverage. Disclaimer: I am no scientist, so this should have a close and thorough look by topic expert. But without additional sources the topic plainly fails WP:GNG (and WP:PROMO). See also the closely related article IBZL in a separate nomination. GermanJoe (talk) 19:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I concur with the nomination and note that I couldn't find anything approaching widespread use other than by the two original authors raising WP:NEO and WP:OR concerns. SmartSE (talk) 21:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Well yes. And I've just added a peacock tag to the article on author Morse's WP article. Tony (talk) 13:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I suppose although I would explore the chance of mentioning this at Stephen P. Morse's article and the best links I found were some at Books and browser. SwisterTwister talk 06:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- 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.