Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outstanding leadership theory (2nd nomination)

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. Jujutacular (talk) 00:32, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding leadership theory

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

Nothing changed since prev nom: remained thoroughly nonnotable (and I's say trivial) theory, with 1-2 occasional mentions. - üser:Altenmann >t 22:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's not a notable book. The concept itself doesn't seem notable either. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Looks to fail WP:GNG, also looks to rely entirely on primary sources. I noticed that there are a surprising number of ghits for some of the article's text. Given the age of the article (and its previous home in the Leadership article), I'm assuming this would've been looked into last time around and found that it was the other sources that copy this (vs. a WP:COPYVIO)? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:55, 13 September 2015 (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.