On 8 March 2014 18:04, Brian J Mingus <brian.mingus(a)colorado.edu> wrote:
The reason the name stuck is that
"Baader-Meinhof" is a weird name, and one
would not expect to see it multiple times independently in short succession.
Hence the name "Baader-Meinhof phenomenon" (which is also the name of a
book) is analogous to onomatopoeia in that both represent the thing they are
describing in some way - this is also similar to homoiconicity. It's a
perfect name - much better than "frequency illusion" - and a substantial
number of people now know it by this name, in part due to its longstanding
and interesting history of existence on Wikipedia, which has advertised it
to hundreds of thousands of people and generated tens of thousands of
websites which use it by that name.
The article should clearly stay!
Now you just need sources to this effect. There's always writing them ...
- d.