Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prerenaturalism: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*'''Delete'''. The what now? [[User:The wub|the wub ]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?/!"</font>]] 13:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Delete'''. The what now? [[User:The wub|the wub ]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?/!"</font>]] 13:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' for satisfying pretty much every VfD criterion. -[[User:EDM|EDM]] 18:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' for satisfying pretty much every VfD criterion. -[[User:EDM|EDM]] 18:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Don't Delete''' This is no hoax....It was discovered and first defined durring a long discussion on ethics and morality. Prerenaturalism may not be widely recognized, but it exists. |
Revision as of 06:20, 1 August 2005
Prerenaturalism
Obvious hoax. The word "prerenaturalism", and "prerenatural" (and all variants thereof) appear to be freshly coined gibberish with no presence whatsoever on Google. The text is convoluted and barely comprehensible, with no means for establishing context or notability. Binadot 03:24, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- I dunno - I get it. A fresh anti-green rant, but a rant nonetheless, and so delete. Denni☯ 03:40, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
- More importantly, it's the product of original research and personal opinion. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, nor is it a repository for mini-essays. Even if this phenomenon were notable and well-documented (and it isn't), it would have to be entirely rewritten for POV and clarity. Binadot 03:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: to call this the product of original research is an insult to original research. -- Hoary 05:18, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
- More importantly, it's the product of original research and personal opinion. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, nor is it a repository for mini-essays. Even if this phenomenon were notable and well-documented (and it isn't), it would have to be entirely rewritten for POV and clarity. Binadot 03:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as nonsense, hoax, rant, non notable. DavidH 03:44, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. I think the author must have meant preternaturalism, but sadly that makes little more sense than the actual title. Wall 'o text rant. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:05, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete this blather about a nonexistent subject. -- Hoary 05:18, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete this pretentious and obvious hoax. --FreelanceWizard 05:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Very poor article on incorrectly named topic. Capitalistroadster 07:13, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, total bolox jamesgibbon 10:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. The what now? the wub "?/!" 13:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Delete for satisfying pretty much every VfD criterion. -EDM 18:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Don't Delete This is no hoax....It was discovered and first defined durring a long discussion on ethics and morality. Prerenaturalism may not be widely recognized, but it exists.