Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parascience

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 redirect to Pseudoscience. Editors are welcome to improve an article that is part of an AFD discussion but do not move or change the status of an article while a discussion is ongoing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Parascience

[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)

I believe this article should be deleted as it is based on a single cited author's idea of "parascience". Additionally, the examples on this page provide little distinction over what is pseudoscience and "parascience", using examples such as Ufology next to Philosophy. I think the dilemmas of using scientific theory within other well established and regarded disciplines outside the natural sciences, such as social science, should be left as discussions on their methodology pages. Looking at Google Scholar, "parascience" as a term returns back a poor collection of sources, when searched on other databases such as Scopus it only returns 15 published articles where "parascience" is used as a pseudonym for pseudoscience, not a distinct conceptualisation as this page is presenting it.

In my opinion this is a very good and clear article as a counterpoint to pseudoscience. This article brings some nuance and states that certain sciences can also be seen as parascience rather than pseudoscience. But that is my opinion. I don't know what others think about this? S. Perquin (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the first sentence to the first sentence from the Dutch Wikipedia article. Sincerely, S. Perquin (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Pseudoscience. Two of the three examples - parapsychology and Ufology - are explicitly called a pseudoscience in their respective articles. The third, astrosociology, seems to be a legitimate, if fairly new, science. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved the information from Parascience to Pseudoscience#Parascience! :-) S. Perquin (talk) 08:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:32, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article was changed to a redirect during this discussion, but the material that existed before that was inadmissible speculation propped up by an unsuitable source. The available literature does not suggest that this is a well-defined, distinct topic that warrants a stand-alone page. XOR'easter (talk) 14:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have undone my action. I will be looking for sources that support the information. S. Perquin (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have found information where in all probability the information from the French Wikipedia was taken from. S. Perquin (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have also changed the first sentence to a better definition of parascience (sources: Collins English Dictionary and Dictionary.com). S. Perquin (talk) 19:17, 18 August 2022 (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.