Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wise Woman Tradition

: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.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

=[[Wise Woman Tradition]]=

:{{la|Wise Woman Tradition}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wise_Woman_Tradition Stats])

:({{Find sources|Wise Woman Tradition}})

Fails general notability. The sources are all self published. There is no information provided which has not been covered in Susun Weed or shamans,witches, midwifery etc. Fails WP:NOT and WP:NEO etc. Ochiwar (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - we also have Cunning folk and there is a standing proposal (from 2013) to merge it and a number of other related articles because information is being duplicated. There's certainly no need to duplicate it again. Stalwart111 22:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - Merge or delete. If this author/book is notable (and I have no idea if it is), there's no reason why it shouldn't be included on those pages. Bali88 (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete -- The first paragraph is all I am concerend with as history; and that is at most a dictionary definition. The rest of it might make a New Age related article, but I see litlte merit in it. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
  • In theory, Wise women tradition (note small letters, generic concept) is likely to be notable. The stub is a huge mess. Can we userfy this for more work on it? Bearian (talk) 22:36, 24 March 2014 (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.