Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Atheistic evolution
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: redirect to Evolutionism. Without deletion, and a note to be placed at Talk:Evolutionism to advise that sources are available in the draft history. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
This draft is elegable for G13 but has been tagged as promising. It has not be put to AfC. Legacypac (talk) 01:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Someone may improve it. The concept is notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- Notable, as shown by what reliable sources? Johnuniq (talk) 03:39, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: which of the existing sources in the draft did you find unreliable? VQuakr (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon: seems like it duplicates an existing topic, Evolutionism. Different connotations maybe, but the same topic as far as I can tell. VQuakr (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- Keep but not as a standalone article. It seems like this could be usefully merged into Evolutionism or similar. Reyk YO! 08:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- All belief in macro evolution is by nature atheistic just as all belief in creation is religious. If someone wants to merge this crappy draft go for it but I can't see how the material will really improve evolution. Legacypac (talk) 08:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- The list of sources seems potentially useful, so redirect to Evolutionism and make a note of the sources' existence on the target's talk page. VQuakr (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.