475:
defines cultural agency theory in most of its aspects, and is a summary of previous wok. The intention is to ensure that the new paradigm, which is now mature, is illustrated in terms of its antecedents. In particular, the work of Eric
Schwarz, seen to be very important and almost lost to the academic world except through the work of Yolles and his colleagues, does need to be recognised historically. A tribute to the work of Schwarz has now also been entered into the wiki site, who died in 2015 with almost no recognition of the significance or potential of his work...a very sad state of affairs for such an important but overlooked academic.
667:"In response to the reviewers, a lot of changes have been made. For instance the insightful comment from the reviewer "nothing in the article indicates that this is a unique or notable concept" has been addressed reflecting the uniqueness in the summary, and creating a definition in terms of its use. Another useful comment is that it is "mostly cited within a small ring of closely-connect authors." While this is correct, one must question the significance of this comment. It is a paradigm supported by a group of people, with its own website (now indicated in the website):
634:. Lastly, even as an academic work, this "review" has major neutrality problems. Everything I have found suggests that CAT was created by Yolles and colleagues. Yolles credits Schwarz and Beer with earlier work upon which CAT is based, but despite this article being about 80% centered on Schwarz, there is no evidence that Schwarz created CAT or ever called it that. This is a tribute piece to Schwarz pretending to be an encyclopedia article on CAT. Without independent reliable sources discussing cultural agency theory in depth, we cannot write a neutral
671:. However, its growing popularity is represented through an increasing download of its papers. For instance the paper cited by Dauber et al has had in excess of 5000 downloads and 27 citations in under 3 years. A new book defining the topic is also coming out this month published by Cambridge University Press. Two authors in the group also have "advanced standing" ReseearchGate ranking, principally due to interest in this work. An attempt to reduce the "word salad" has been made, including a tightening of references.
582:
extend, a laundry list of systems concepts to no apparent end. It would be one thing if it were a list of assumptions building used to draw a logical conclusion, but instead it's just a list of assumptions and long names for simple concepts. I'm reminded of the slough of "nature inspired algorithms" that showed up here a month ago all describing roughly the same trivial and naive methodology and claiming to "potentially solve" the
557:
advances. This is not pseudo-science, or a case of academics throwing around "science-isms", but actual science with actual, concrete outcomes. I agree that the article is vaguely worded and full of jargon that conveys little meaning to the average reader, but the same could be said for most of
Knowledge's articles on topics related to
298:)Just solved disambiguation problem. Now I'am working to simplify the topic to make it more understandable for the readers. Also references are made (to solve the problem "orphan page") on its all'agency theory page and adapt complex system (CAS). The problem of disambiguations is resolved. We look forward to your comments
630:--we don't write articles drawing our own conclusions about primary sources, we summarize secondary sources, such as published reviews or books on CAT. I've been unable to find independent secondary sources on cultural agency theory, so in addition to synth problems, this topic also seems to fail notability thresholds per
518:
do (which is essentially nothing). It's mostly cited within a small ring of closely-connect authors (Schwarz, Beer, Yolles), which does not indicate notability. The content of several sections is basically word salad which does not serve to describe the concept at hand, instead opting to say "the sky
556:
Systems and network theory are increasingly being applied to social systems, with an eye toward understanding the behaviors of populations on a macro scale. These applications have already been applied in the field of counter-terrorism and organized crime, and could lead to all sorts of sociological
474:
This wiki entry is not an attempt to introduce new material to wiki. It is not original research and synthesis, since much of it comes from two books by Yolles in 1999 and 2006, plus additional publications over the last 9 years. This website is also a reflection of the book by Guo et al (2016) that
581:
Sorry, I'm not trying to discredit cybernetics/social systems theory as a whole (although I'd appreciate it if you could give references to its applications in criminology). It's specifically the way this article (and the sources) are written. This content seeks to describe, rather than analyze or
673:
Additional adjustments to the website include moving text from the dissipative systems section into the
Schrwarzian modelling section where it belongs. More wiki and other links have been created for technical terms, and the text has been smoothed in an attempt to improve understanding. The text
756:
The page has been structurally modified trusting that, in this way, it can be maintained on wiki. the images with copyright issues were removed. And about secondary sources: it is coming out a book using CAT by Guo et al If the problem is with history and foundation, we can keep only the first
410:
of work to make this article accessible, but I understand that the author has written a review of the topic rather than an original treatise on the topic. Since other editors have agreed to delete, I won't withdraw the nomination, but rather change my own position to
360:
CAT is not a my personal idea. It is (at least) 10 years old. It is a successful paradigm not yet represented through Wiki: my proposal is to talk about it, refferring to the main systemic authors which contributed to the theory development (Beer, Schwarz, Yolles
469:
Dear editors, we are working a lot to fix the page on the light of your kind suggestions. Thank you for your comprehension. I had also the pleasure to share the page with your Yolles
Professor in the person who has asked me to post this comment on his behalf:
527:, it smells like postmodern bunk. It really gets my goat that there are academics out there throwing math- and science-isms around like this and and believing it's comparable to someone using actual math and science to advance
173:
819:, I see that it has not been published yet, so obviously cannot be a source at this time. If/when the book does come out, one of the authors is Yolles, the originator of CAT. Hence the book cannot be considered an
625:
This article looks like a review of primary sources discussing cultural agency theory (CAT) and earlier theories it is based on. As such, it is a synthesis of primary sources that does not belong on
Knowledge, per
332:
too complex for most
Knowledge readers to understand, but that can be fixed. The problem with this article, and the reason it is being considered for deletion, is that it appears to comprise a great deal of
600:
I have modified the opening to respond to comments about not defining what CAT is. In other words, I tried to explain in simple terms (even the average person to understand) a systemic theory --
126:
167:
514:
And yet, nothing in the article indicates that this is a unique or notable concept. In fact, it never actually defines "Cultural Agency Theory"; instead, it lists what it CAT
888:
Guo, K.J., Yolles, M., Fink, G., Iles, P., 2016, The
Changing Organisation: Agency Theory in a Cross-cultural Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming.
204:
This article appears to be an attempt to post an academic journal article on
Knowledge. While no copyright violation can be found, the article appears to comprise
494:
785:
Actually, if the article is retained, I would recommend deleting the section on the "Nature of agency" as
Knowledge already has an entire article on the topic (
337:, which is not what Knowledge is about. You need to find a more conventional venue to publish your article, such as a journal on social systems or some such.
99:
94:
694:
I think is an important voice that was actually missing in wikipedia. The citations are correct. and it is well written. It should be kept on the wiki
757:
sections: 1 What is CAT? 2 The Nature of Agency, considering this page as an important point of view in systemic theory, actually missing in wikipedia.
103:
674:
overall now properly conforms the the wiki model. Elaboration has also been made to the background of
Schwarz, who should not be another lost hero."
133:
86:
239:, and the word "cultural" is sometimes latched on to that term. But these other uses that I were able to find were different from our article's.
565:. Complex subjects are often difficult to boil down to language accessible to laymen. I hope this article can be improved to meet that goal.
256:
per WikiDan's explanation. It's pretty clearly ripped right from an academic paper with all the broken reference formatting left intact.
731:
188:
709:
155:
244:
800:
724:
Please keep it. The subject is important and the content is well written. Can be arobust reference for scholars and students.
572:
422:
344:
215:
17:
313:
831:
criteria. Without independent reliable sources, no one can reliably write a neutral, verifiable article on the topic. --
149:
236:
840:
804:
769:
739:
713:
684:
651:
609:
595:
583:
576:
544:
519:
is blue" in as many ways as possible. Unsurprisingly, the freely available references are written in a similar manner.
506:
486:
461:
426:
348:
285:
265:
248:
240:
219:
68:
817:
145:
863:
790:
90:
40:
195:
735:
275:(some academic journals now advise article authors to do self-promote their published articles on Knowledge.)
502:
82:
74:
705:
859:
836:
828:
647:
281:
36:
701:
727:
697:
660:
After reading the comments on this page, Maurice Yolles asked me to bring his point of view. I quote:
301:
232:
as mentioned by nominator. This is all I were able to find to use the term in our article's context:
161:
786:
181:
811:
780:
761:
758:
676:
601:
478:
323:
305:
591:
540:
498:
261:
765:
680:
605:
562:
558:
482:
309:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
858:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
233:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
832:
751:
643:
454:
277:
627:
328:
Disambiguation is not the problem here. Nor is the complexity of the article. The article
229:
228:
Even the firstmost source cited doesn't seem to contain the term? Seems like mostly heavy
794:
566:
528:
438:
416:
383:
366:
355:
338:
293:
209:
59:
631:
587:
551:
536:
446:
334:
257:
205:
824:
53:
120:
639:
635:
532:
852:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
389:
377:
208:, drawing new conclusions based on the cited source material.
668:
395:
642:
article on the topic. Hence deletion seems warranted. --
384:
https://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_types_of_systems_theory
116:
112:
108:
180:
816:
From the Google Books page for the Guo, et. al., book
525:In my opinion and outside of the scope of this AfD
406:I'm coming around on this one. It's going to take
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
866:). No further edits should be made to this page.
194:
8:
495:list of Science-related deletion discussions
493:Note: This debate has been included in the
535:- none of the cost and all of the reward. -
725:
695:
492:
299:
879:Private correspondence: 24-09-2016 e-mail
872:
390:https://en.wikipedia.org/Systems_theory
378:https://en.wikipedia.org/Living_systems
531:. It's like the academic version of a
789:), and the content here represents a
7:
396:https://en.wikipedia.org/Autopoiesis
235:. There is the general concept of
24:
823:reliable source by Knowledge's
206:original research and synthesis
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
841:18:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
805:14:07, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
770:11:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
740:08:49, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
714:23:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
685:11:32, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
652:10:30, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
610:08:54, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
596:16:08, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
577:15:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
545:15:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
507:11:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
487:09:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
427:21:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
349:11:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
286:21:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
273:as per Nom and editors above.
266:21:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
249:18:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
220:18:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
69:08:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
1:
52:. Consensus is that this is
584:Travelling Salesman Problem
371:Cross referencing improved:
905:
669:http://www.octresearch.net
855:Please do not modify it.
398:12:57, 21 September 2016
32:Please do not modify it.
793:which is undesirable.
462:Mr. Magoo and McBarker
83:Cultural Agency Theory
75:Cultural Agency Theory
787:Agency (philosophy)
742:
730:comment added by
716:
700:comment added by
563:quantum mechanics
559:relativity theory
516:could potentially
509:
335:original research
317:
304:comment added by
276:
67:
896:
889:
886:
880:
877:
857:
815:
797:
784:
755:
569:
555:
465:
458:
450:
442:
419:
370:
359:
341:
327:
297:
274:
212:
199:
198:
184:
136:
124:
106:
66:
64:
57:
34:
904:
903:
899:
898:
897:
895:
894:
893:
892:
887:
883:
878:
874:
870:
864:deletion review
853:
809:
803:
795:
778:
749:
575:
567:
549:
471:
459:
452:
444:
436:
425:
417:
364:
353:
347:
339:
321:
291:
218:
210:
141:
132:
97:
81:
78:
60:
58:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
902:
900:
891:
890:
881:
871:
869:
868:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
829:WP:INDEPENDENT
799:
772:
744:
743:
718:
717:
664:
663:
662:
661:
655:
654:
619:
618:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
571:
529:control theory
521:
520:
511:
510:
468:
467:
466:
432:
430:
429:
421:
400:
399:
392:
386:
380:
373:
372:
362:
351:
343:
289:
288:
268:
251:
214:
202:
201:
138:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
901:
885:
882:
876:
873:
867:
865:
861:
856:
850:
849:
842:
838:
834:
830:
826:
822:
818:
813:
808:
807:
806:
802:
798:
792:
788:
782:
777:
773:
771:
767:
763:
760:
753:
748:
747:
746:
745:
741:
737:
733:
732:151.28.147.25
729:
723:
720:
719:
715:
711:
707:
703:
699:
693:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
682:
678:
672:
670:
659:
658:
657:
656:
653:
649:
645:
641:
638:, verifiable
637:
633:
629:
624:
621:
620:
611:
607:
603:
599:
598:
597:
593:
589:
585:
580:
579:
578:
574:
570:
564:
560:
553:
548:
547:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
523:
522:
517:
513:
512:
508:
504:
500:
499:Coolabahapple
496:
491:
490:
489:
488:
484:
480:
476:
463:
456:
448:
440:
435:
434:
433:
428:
424:
420:
414:
409:
405:
402:
401:
397:
393:
391:
387:
385:
381:
379:
375:
374:
368:
363:
357:
352:
350:
346:
342:
336:
331:
325:
320:
319:
318:
315:
311:
307:
303:
295:
287:
283:
279:
272:
269:
267:
263:
259:
255:
252:
250:
246:
242:
238:
237:agency theory
234:
231:
227:
224:
223:
222:
221:
217:
213:
207:
197:
193:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
147:
144:
143:Find sources:
139:
135:
131:
128:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
76:
73:
71:
70:
65:
63:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
884:
875:
854:
851:
820:
791:content fork
775:
726:— Preceding
721:
696:— Preceding
691:
675:
666:
665:
622:
524:
515:
473:
472:
431:
412:
407:
403:
329:
300:— Preceding
290:
270:
253:
225:
203:
191:
185:
177:
170:
164:
158:
152:
142:
129:
61:
49:
47:
31:
28:
833:Mark viking
821:independent
752:Mark viking
702:Gandalf1974
644:Mark viking
455:E.M.Gregory
278:E.M.Gregory
168:free images
62:Sandstein
860:talk page
796:WikiDan61
568:WikiDan61
439:WikiDan61
418:WikiDan61
413:weak keep
367:WikiDan61
356:WikiDan61
340:WikiDan61
294:WikiDan61
241:Mr. Magoo
211:WikiDan61
37:talk page
862:or in a
801:ReadMe!!
728:unsigned
710:contribs
698:unsigned
628:WP:SYNTH
588:Jergling
573:ReadMe!!
552:Jergling
537:Jergling
447:Jergling
423:ReadMe!!
345:ReadMe!!
314:contribs
302:unsigned
258:Jergling
230:WP:SYNTH
216:ReadMe!!
127:View log
39:or in a
812:Dadif89
781:Dadif89
776:Comment
762:Dadif89
759:Dadif89
722:Comment
692:Comment
677:Dadif89
602:Dadif89
479:Dadif89
404:Comment
324:Dadif89
306:Dadif89
174:WPÂ refs
162:scholar
100:protect
95:history
632:WP:GNG
623:Delete
271:Delete
254:Delete
226:Delete
146:Google
104:delete
50:delete
825:WP:RS
533:mimic
408:a lot
189:JSTOR
150:books
134:Stats
121:views
113:watch
109:links
54:WP:OR
16:<
837:talk
827:and
766:talk
736:talk
706:talk
681:talk
648:talk
640:WP:V
636:WP:N
606:talk
592:talk
541:talk
503:talk
483:talk
361:etc)
310:talk
282:talk
262:talk
245:talk
182:FENS
156:news
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
586:. -
561:or
394:in
388:in
382:in
376:in
196:TWL
125:– (
839:)
774:*
768:)
738:)
712:)
708:•
683:)
650:)
608:)
594:)
543:)
505:)
497:.
485:)
477:--
451::
443::
415:.
330:is
316:)
312:•
284:)
264:)
247:)
176:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
56:.
835:(
814::
810:@
783::
779:@
764:(
754::
750:@
734:(
704:(
679:(
646:(
604:(
590:(
554::
550:@
539:(
501:(
481:(
464::
460:@
457::
453:@
449::
445:@
441::
437:@
369::
365:@
358::
354:@
326::
322:@
308:(
296::
292:@
280:(
260:(
243:(
200:)
192:·
186:·
178:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
153:·
148:(
140:(
137:)
130:·
123:)
85:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.