Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unreflective copying bias
Selective merge''' to List of cognitive biases. I was only able to find the one primary reference for this bias, the paper referenced in the article.  Of the secondary references in the article, the Royal Society article is not independent and the other two are uncritical, simply summarizing the main results of the paper. Given that this work hasn't been subject to careful review by reliable secondary sources, the topic fails notability thresholds per .  Given that the experiment results haven't been reproduced elsewhere, verifiability comes into question as well. But the assertion that this bias exists and has been subject to the paper peer review is verifiable, so it seems worth a mention in List of cognitive biases with refs verifying. Basically, it is  for this topic to develop the multiple in-depth reliable sources needed to write an unbiased article. That the article was likely written by one of the authors of the paper also raises concerns about neutrality. Without proper independent RS, I don't think we can make the article neutral
— User:Mark, 17:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:TOOSOON (Wikipedia:Notability)