Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dialectic process vs. dialogic process

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 merge to dialogic. or to dialectic MBisanz ^talk 01:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dialectic process vs. dialogic process[edit]

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

This article has been around since 2003, so I feel a little bad for beating up on the old timer. But this just isn't the sort of thing that we do in the modern conception of Wikipedia. The article concept embodied by the title suggests essay-style original research. But the article's actual contents don't even really do that, merely interweaving snippets of information about the two philosophical methods. We have a fairly comprehensive article on dialectic and an ... article on dialogic. the only source here is a source about dialectic. There's literally nothing being referenced to support the article's ostensible premise. There are sources that discuss both viewpoints (including quite a few that consider them compatible), but I think we would be better off using such sources to strengthen the articles on the parent topics rather than craft a novel synthesis here (especially with the terrible title). We don't need this, especially if this is the fruit of nearly a decade; the original author is banned, and the only other significant contributors outside the ebb and flow of templating were a handful of IP editors (probably the same human) in 2009. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. There is some good information here that probably ought to be folded into the article on dialectic and shown some citation love. The distinction is confusing to people just beginning to dip their toes into philosophy, and I'd hate to see it thrown out without having the information kept somewhere. --Roman à clef (talk) 20:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge is the correct solution here, I think. This is an old school unsourced original essay from the days when WP was young. The encyclopedic concepts are Dialectic process and Dialogic process, the comparison is an essay. Each of those can reasonably be modified to contrast the one with the other (technically through merger), but the unsourced comparison is not encyclopedic, in my estimation. Carrite (talk) 03:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Part of my problem here is that there's not much to merge. The dialogic article needs some love from someone who cares, but even still, I don't think there's much to add from this essay (especially without sources). The dialectic article is in much better shape. Some comparison/contrast with other philosophical methods might be a nice addition, but there's not any actual comparison going on here, either, despite the name. Just a snippet of one idea, then a snippet of the other. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 07:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Here's a review of sources.
- A paper that explores some of the differences between the two.
- An abstract of a paper that explores the differences in the context of education.
- Another book on dialogues and dialectics.
- Another book on dialogics and dialectics in education.
- Yet another on educational research and the two approaches is here.
- An examination of Abraham Lincoln's rhetoric that discusses the two terms.

These are pretty good sources, but my problem with them is that they don't seem to treat the differences between dialogic and dialectic outside of the context of another subject they're exploring. In other words, they don't treat dialectic versus dialogic in a pure way, as a philosophic divergence. Hence arguably there is not enough coverage directly of the topic at hand in reliable, secondary sources to qualify under WP:GNG. From a purely practical standpoint, we could address this in a couple of ways. We could 1) have small sections on the difference in the dialogic and dialectic articles, with a seealso-type template to this article. Or 2) we could simply incorporate the material into the dialogic and dialectic articles, and delete this one. To me, the second option is more desirable, since it's really about definitions and there isn't a substantial amount to add in a standalone article. I can't cite a specific guideline that calls for this, but I think we can argue that Dialectic process vs. dialogic process doesn't warrant a separate article under WP:GNG, although I can see an argument that sources like the ones above establish it as having attracted significant coverage. I'm not 100% sure on this, but given the above I believe it would be most practical and reasonable to merge. --Batard0 (talk) 15:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Per Batard0. — ΛΧΣ21™ 19:44, 30 October 2012 (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.