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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can . Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interobject (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

100% advert of a certain deleted Mark J. Blechner tagged since 2018. Primary sources, with occasional tangential other refs, which do not disccuss the subject. Looks like WP:COI to me. The creator Zeke8888 (talk · contribs) plugged Blecher into numerous articles, all eventually removed. --Altenmann >talk 21:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - another interesting idea, but in this case the article is a synthesis of Freud and a non-notable psychologist, which is sort of ironic. Bearian (talk) 13:43, 25 February 2025 (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.