Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Learning Gain

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 of the debate was Delete. --Deathphoenix 02:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Learning Gain

The content of the article appears to be not verifiable. As far as I can tell "Learning Gain" is not a theory (psychological or otherwise) that has been published in an academic source. Nesbit 06:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete Delete — This article claims to be about some so-called Learning Gain Theory that has zero hits on Google. I'm not a fan of the Google test but in this case its really too obvious. — Hillel 06:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • What CSD are you claiming this falls under? As much as I'd like to speedy this, I can't find a justification. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    • You're right. 1. I thought at first this qualified as a hoax, but hoaxes are no candidates for speedy deletion, and 2. I now realize this is more probably WP:OR. Changed my vote to Delete. — Hillel 06:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. Doesn't quite make sense. Same author as 'Relative Time' which I listed for AfD below --Lockley 06:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Dbtfz (talk - contribs) 06:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete sort of a mini-essay. Ruby 03:49, 27 January 2006 (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.