Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structural evil

: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 keep (non-admin closure) Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Structural evil

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

WP is not a dictionary. This article is merely a dictionary definition of the phrase "structural evil" and is not encyclopaedic. Refs are all further definitions of the phrase. GregJackP Boomer! 14:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Our policy WP:DICDEF explains that "One perennial source of confusion is that a stub encyclopedia article looks very much like a stub dictionary entry, and stubs are often poorly written." I have expanded the topic a little to demonstrate the difference. See also our editing policy. Andrew D. (talk) 18:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As expanded, I do not have a problem with the article and would not object to an admin closing the AfD as withdrawn. GregJackP Boomer! 18:21, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a valid stub. Bearian (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A valid topic. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:36, 23 April 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.