Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science and Consciousness Review
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further 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 No consensus. Woohookitty 07:33, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Science and Consciousness Review
Should this go in the "External links" section of consciousness instead? —Ghakko 4 July 2005 09:09 (UTC)
- Delete. It may be relevant to the above mentioned article (it should be checked for relevance and academic merit), but certainly doesn't warrant an article. Harro5 July 4, 2005 09:28 (UTC)
- Speedy - as an article whose contents consist only of an external link. Naturenet | Talk 4 July 2005 12:33 (UTC)
- Speedy, as per the above vote. Not a link repository, and etc. --Alex12 3 4 July 2005 12:50 (UTC)
- Keep and expand - This is a legitimate site and does warrant a separate article, so long as that article is longer than a sentence. GabrielF 4 July 2005 18:06 (UTC)
- Keep and expand - The organization smacks of psuedoscience at first, but it may not be. At least two members of the journal's editorial board listed on the website have EnWiki entries of their own (Christof Koch and Walter Freeman). I call this one notable. Fernando Rizo 4 July 2005 19:20 (UTC)
-
- Comment I can assure you that it is legitimate science - Ned Block and Patricia Churchland are on the editorial board as well. This is an area which science is just starting to be able to address because of the cognitive revolution in psychology.
- Weak Keep and expand. This is borderline. JamesBurns 5 July 2005 01:18 (UTC)
- Weak Merge as per Ghakko. The page seems useful, but adding the link still feels a bit like advertising. --IByte 5 July 2005 16:04 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
