Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassiopaeans

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. Robert 00:58, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cassiopaeans

• Delete as sheer vanity and unverifiable cruft. See author's similar flights of fancy at Laura Knight-Jadczyk, Cassiopean (already deleted), and 6th_density. - Sensor 23:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. -- Foofy 02:53, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment It gets a lot of google hits [1] --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 05:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

And the website (cassiopaea.org) has Alexa rank under 200,000 [2], which isn't bad for a crank site. Haeleth

• Delete non-encyclopaedic (might be a place for it in a discussion of channelling, bt certainly not as a main article of this length and subjectivity) - Just zis Guy, you know? 14:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - as Kzollman points out, it's possible that this topic could be described as "notable", but I'm sure not volunteering to find out. And even if there was a worthy article to be written on the subject, I really don't see it evolving from this start. Haeleth 17:13, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete insufficiently notable crackpottery. MCB 21:25, 19 October 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.