This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
The lab meeting, Cogfog, isn't independently notable from the work of either Robert A. Bjork or Elizabeth L. Bjork and is hence best merge to one of their pages. I suggest this one, as the older, better-developed page. Klbrain (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment and suggestion. Merging Cogfog with either of the Bjork's pages is one possibility. However, Cogfog is more than just a meeting, as is explained on the page. It also is the lab group itself, and that lab group has included >100 people besides the Bjorks through the years -- other faculty, post-docs, grad students, undergraduate students, and visiting researchers. I have added references to academic journals for some of the key research articles published by Cogfog members through the years. While the Bjorks are co-authors on many of the articles, lots of other Cogfog members are co-authors as well. This change should help show the notable research that has been conducted by Cogfog as a group, not just the Bjorks. Mikeb716 (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Papers from members of the group establish the notability of the work/field, but not of Cogfog. What's needed to establish notability would be reliable source, independent of Cogfog, that discuss the group independently of the Bjorks. Note that most university departments (like UCLA Department of Psychology) don't reach the required level of notability, no research groups within them are also very unlikely to! Klbrain (talk) 10:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Following the AfD outcome of redirect, closing as redundant. Klbrain (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry. I was out of town this past week and not able to take part in the discussion about the Cogfog article. I see that it has been deleted already. I'm sorry to see that. As I tried to explain earlier, it is not redundant with Robert Bjork because many other people contributed to Cogfog over the years. Also, Cogfog is not just the name of the weekly lab meeting (as is incorrectly stated above in this discussion). The Cogfog article clearly explained that the term "Cogfog" refers to the meeting as well as the lab itself.
If you think the separate Cogfog article should be deleted, at least please merge most of the content from that article with Robert Bjork's page. That would add important details to Robert Bjork's article. The breadth of the work of the lab and the longevity of the lab make it noteworthy. Including the details from the Cogfog article on Robert Bjork's page would be better than deleting that information entirely.
Resolved