| Revision as of 03:51, 6 March 2006 editNihonjoe (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Template editors124,533 edits →[]: sounds like conspiracy theory← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 22:19, 29 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' | |||
| <!-- | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result of the debate was '''delete'''. ] 00:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| Second nomination. See discussions ] and ] / ] 23:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC) | Second nomination. See discussions ] and ] / ] 23:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Line 7: | Line 14: | ||
| *'''Keep''' It can become a page about science's strugle against forces (govt and religion and custom) that want to shut it up/hide it/deny it/make it illegal because it doesnt go with the existing power structure] 03:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' It can become a page about science's strugle against forces (govt and religion and custom) that want to shut it up/hide it/deny it/make it illegal because it doesnt go with the existing power structure] 03:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::Sounds more like some sort of conspiracy theory article to me, rather than fact. --] 03:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | ::Sounds more like some sort of conspiracy theory article to me, rather than fact. --] 03:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Dicdef. Only common use of the phrase is in ] magazine, which bills itself as "Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact". ] 04:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', dicdef. ] 05:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' permastub. ] 06:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' ] 13:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per NickelShoe. --<span style="background:gold;">]]</span>] 15:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per nom -- ] 17:25, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' ddef. ] 00:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' ddef. ] 06:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div> | |||
Latest revision as of 22:19, 29 March 2022
- 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 of the debate was delete. W.marsh 00:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Science fact
Second nomination. See discussions here and here / Ezeu 23:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Although I originally deprodded this (because prod isn't appropriate for an article that survived VfD), I think Ezeu is right. I don't see how this can ever be more than a dictionary definition, and I don't see where it could be merged. It's just a wordplay--not actually about science fiction or science either one. NickelShoe 23:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. --日本穣 00:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per NickelShoe. I don't see it ever achieving more content than is here. —C.Fred (talk) 01:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as per NickelShoe. Sliggy 01:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Keep It can become a page about science's strugle against forces (govt and religion and custom) that want to shut it up/hide it/deny it/make it illegal because it doesnt go with the existing power structurePatcat88 03:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds more like some sort of conspiracy theory article to me, rather than fact. --日本穣 03:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Dicdef. Only common use of the phrase is in Analog magazine, which bills itself as "Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact". Fan1967 04:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, dicdef. Sandstein 05:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete permastub. Melchoir 06:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Rick Norwood 13:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per NickelShoe. --Siva1979 15:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom -- Alpha269 17:25, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete ddef. Deckiller 00:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete ddef. KennyLucius 06:47, 7 March 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.