Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bicuriosus

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 in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — JIP | Talk 08:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bicuriosus, Heterocuriosus, Homocuriosus and Noncuriosus

These 4 articles, Bicuriosus, Heterocuriosus, Homocuriosus and Noncuriosus, are scientifically suspect. Google searches on all 4 terms return only the Wikipedia pages and nothing else. Without any substantiation available, I ask for a DELETE Wahming 09:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. 10:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete WP:V A1kmm 10:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as unverifiable. I asked the original editor about them right after they were created. He said that he got the information from speaking with "a shrink for kids." This makes me think that, at best, it's original research on the part of the "shrink." Joyous (talk) 12:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Deletiosus per Joyous . BD2412 T 14:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete OR. I was going to nominate them myself when they were originally created, but Joyous had only just asked their author for verification, and it seemed unfair to nominate without giving them a chance to support the article. Since they have not done so, the articles should go. — Haeleth Talk 18:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Joyous.--Isotope23 21:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as original research/unverifiable. --Carnildo 00:39, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, original research. I got 2 google hits for Bicuriosus. Punkmorten 00:41, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
• undecided, I'm the original author of these entries. I've been trying to find the source for my friends information and have found nothing. I have no objections to them being deleted. Although i believe they have been published i do not know the location. I will do nothing to resist the deletion.

• Delete If this is intended to be humorous or an example of humorous, it should be labelled as such. It is very easy to be "sarcastic" w/o labelling it and then make all sorts of innocent claims when challenged.--71.193.3.242 20:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Original research. *drew 03:18, 16 November 2005 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.