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 move to draftspace. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. It now rests at Draft:Critical social justice. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Critical social justice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The current contents of this article should not stay under this title, as it is, for our purposes, a neologism: the framework essentially describes the work of Özlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo who do not use the term, with the citation of de Vita (2014) appearing to serve only to suggest coherence to the term. The previous AfD was closed as no consensus, but documented serious WP:SYNTH issues with the article; the attempts to repair them resulted in an article that is entirely misleading about the fact that the term was proposed by Lindsay and Pluckrose, who are introduced first in 'The Response' section. Note the WP:NEO policy requires that we have reliable sources tying the term we use for a topic with the characterisation of the topic we use: for the article as it stands, such reliable sources do not appear to exist.

The article was created this year and had it been created as a draft, it would be unlikely to pass AfC. I propose that the article be moved to draft space, since the attempt to solve the problems with the article in the course of the AfD resulted in the unacceptable article we have now. The writing in the article is mostly OK, apart from the essentially deceptive form the article takes, and it seems likely there is some home for much of the content. — Charles Stewart (talk) 22:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to draftspace per nom - This remains a neologism with essentially no usage outside a small activist group; its declared intent being to "brand" the social justice movement with a negative label. Scholarly sources and non-ideological sources don't use the phrase at all. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 00:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to draft - Agree with the fact that the sources don't match the term. FiddleheadLady (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2021 (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.