Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spiritual density

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 00:08, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spiritual density

Original research. I appreciate that this has been written in good faith as an attempt to describe and integrate the recurrent belief in levels of spiritual existence/attainment. However, it's not a comparative objective summary like similar pages (e.g. Subtle body, Septenary (Theosophy) and Plane (cosmology)) but an essay expounding a personal take on the topic. Tearlach 18:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know enough about Theosophy to know if this could just be moved to something like Spiritual levels in Theosophy if it reflects the views of the Theosophy movement, or if instead it is just OR and a personal PV essay. MCB 04:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. When I first marked the article as POV-laden and needing cleanup, I wasn't aware of the articles we already had covering the topic in a more encyclopedic fashion. Anville 09:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - view as proposer. Tearlach 09:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Here are the Wikipedia:Peer_review#Spiritual_density comments. My personal preference would be to clean this up with authoritative references, but I’m not at all sure what they would be. I did some Googling and found myself coming back to this article or another unreferenced page. Apparently, the primary contributor is unaware, unable, and/or unwilling to make the requested citations. — RDF ^talk 21:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No authoritative citations. These concerns apply whether this is a free-standing article or as a section in another article. — RDF ^talk 21:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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 article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

I wish I'd seen this in time to vote on it. Some of the edits were high quality. Is there any way to extract them for possible inclusion in another article? -- 216.234.56.130 20:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]