Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thought space

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Dakota 05:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thought space

Thought space (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Seems very much like original research. No sources are given, I could not find anything reliable, and the overall tone supports it. Crystallina 01:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete Looks like a leader for the thought space website scope_creep 01:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Original research, no references --Steve 02:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Per above -- wtfunkymonkey 02:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Original research. Xdenizen 02:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:OR, found no support in my google search. -MrFizyx 02:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. EVula 05:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, original research, and because of its nature, it looks to be inherently unverifiable. JIP | Talk 10:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above and WP:V. - SpLoT / (talk) 12:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, WP:OR, WP:V. --Terence Ong (C | R) 14:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete and maybe create a redirect to Theory of forms... It sounds vaugely similar (sort of). At any rate, a re-direct could discourage re-creation.
  • Delete Unless a philosophy can be cited to reliable sources this is OR. The failure of the google search by MrFizyx shows it is not notable. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per all of the above. Nishkid64 19:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep/Merge Scientific Research, however unverifiable, should be kept in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thadmoore (talk • contribs) November 7, 2006
    • Then your opinion directly contradicts our Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research official policies. Please read them. Uncle G 20:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    • User:Thadmoore's firstsecond edit was today, see also Thad Moore (if it hasn't been speedied yet, self professed notable 13 year old mathematician) Pete.Hurd 20:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • delete as per many above Pete.Hurd 20:40, 7 November 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.