Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ordinary Design Theory

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 14:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ordinary Design Theory

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Designism.

Original research. Zero google hits on the phrase "ordinary design theory". Also, the references listed don't mention this theory. They do mention a technique used to tell if a painting is a forgery or not, but the article is much broader than that and therefore not verified. Xyzzyplugh 14:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Term is not notable/in common use, content is largely original research. FeloniousMonk 15:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Apparently some sort of alleged mathematical test for the presence of Dennett's intentional stance; seems like original research to me, and likely redundant to the intelligent design article. Smerdis of Tlön 16:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. WAS 4.250 16:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as subsection of intelligent design. See, you just run this program and it says there is a designer for the universe, but looking around, he may not be so imtelligent.Edison 02:04, 30 July 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.