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. (will redirect for now but content is of course available for merging) Wizardman 00:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Singleness of Purpose[edit]

Singleness of Purpose (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Sources are all self-published. This is language and a concept used exclusively in twelve-step programs. Should either be deleted or merged with twelve-step program. -- Scarpy (talk) 18:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:N and WP:RS. Undeath (talk) 20:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge I agree that it is language used within twelve-step programs. I disagree that within that context, it is not notable. There are many articles and seminars around this issue, and it is of great importance to the recovery community. Bruce Garrison 07:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Advocate70 (talk • contribs)

• Merge Outside of the Fifth Tradition of Alcoholics Anonymous and other Twelve Step Programs, the term has no notability. Eauhomme (talk) 04:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Twelve traditions, since it's an analysis of a facet of a twelve-step program. Singleness of purpose isn't exclusive to addiction recovery programs, so it's kind of ironic that this article about singleness of purpose seems to serve only one purpose. The only thing that would make it more ironic would be if the article was created by a "single purpose account". Ironic or not, however, this commentary on one of the traditions in a "12 tradition" list doesn't merit it's own separate article. Mandsford (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Twelve traditions - appears to be the 5th tradition, not step. PhilKnight (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2008 (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.