Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dream sharing

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 was delete. - Mailer Diablo 04:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dream sharing

• Keep This is a known shamanistic tenet. Reference Taisha Abelar, The Sorcerer's Crossing.

This "unstudied" and "hypothetical" phenomenon fails the policies on verifiability, original research, and reliable sources, and is utter tripe to boot. Byrgenwulf 08:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Quack-cruft. 205.157.110.11 09:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MER-C 09:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. PJM 12:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - "never been extensively studied" + "anecdotal evidence" = unencyclopaedic. BTLizard 12:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - besides the reasons mentioned above, I suspect the whole purpose of the article is to provide an advert for the links below. --Charlesknight 12:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• DeleteUnless someone can dig up something verifiable and reputable. Canadian-Bacon ^{t c e} 18:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete bollocks. Danny Lilithborne 19:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Nishkid64 21:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep it - Sorry if this isnt how I should vote, I checked the guide about it but couldn't understand too well. In my view, this article is a good stub about a relevant fact and should be kept. 200.230.213.152 23:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above.UberCryxic 00:40, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Wryspy 19:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. The phenomenon is imaginary, but used extensively in the arts, and (incorrect) belief that the phenomenon could be real or has actually occured to one is widespread. Not much of the current article should be salvaged, but an article or section about this will have to be written at some point. It's not real, but we should have an article about it (see God). RandomP 13:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. Yamaguchi先生 05:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This is tripe, but it asserts its importance. AfD is premature. Should be edited for WP:V and then brought back for an AfD. JASpencer 09:02, 23 September 2006 (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.