| Revision as of 02:55, 7 August 2005 editDreamGuy (talk | contribs)33,601 edits restoring comments deleted by Gabrielsimon, creator of article up for VfD← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:58, 7 August 2005 edit undoGabrielsimon (talk | contribs)2,118 edits once again, all you ever do is pick on people and throw your opinions around, your comments are in bad faith and will be deleted, again if i have to, anyone wishing to help can.Next edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| *'''Keep''' - sounds like the article could do with expansion though. ] 01:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' - sounds like the article could do with expansion though. ] 01:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' - this article is a work in progress. by the by, is ] a sockpuppet of DreamGuy? his workings almost EXACTLY DreamGuy's style. ] 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' - this article is a work in progress. by the by, is ] a sockpuppet of DreamGuy? his workings almost EXACTLY DreamGuy's style. ] 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Comment:''' No, he's not, and no the style isn't even close (for example, this article is clearly not against religion, it was put there so you could rant against psychiatrists, per your conversations on ] and ], among others), and you are one to talk about sockpuppets, having written the article in question under one. ] 02:29, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *<s>'''Keep'''</s> - this acrticle could use some reworking, but its not non notable.] 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | *<s>'''Keep'''</s> - this acrticle could use some reworking, but its not non notable.] 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Comment:''' Considering the prevalence of sockpuppets on articles Gabrielsimon has been fighting over lately, I will have to call upon the official ] policy and point out that this person doesn't come close to the 100 edits one needs to verify oneself as an actual real person and would note that the edits he/she does have are extremely suspicious, jumping into articles closely related to ones Gabrielsimon worked on but that aren't otherwise related. ] 02:29, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' Could be a great article soon. ] 02:18, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Could be a great article soon. ] 02:18, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' - As described by ] on the discussion page, "I can see there being a good article on religion and mental illness, but as this page stands, it's POV, unencyclopedic in the style it's written, and it has no sources. My suggestion is that it be deleted, and the creator (or someone else) puts it on a user subpage and works on it there, until it's ready to face the public, as it were." Also, singling out schizotypy as a specific disorder to mention in the title is really quite odd as it's just one minor classification out of a whole range that would be important for a comparison between religion and psychology in general or mental disorders more specifically. If the article stayed around waiting for cleanup it would just get redirectede to a real article on the topic under a better name, and this title is so specific it's really unnecessary as a redirect as nobody would think to go looking for it instead of, say, ] or ] or whatnot. This article is a completely unsalvagable mess. ] 02:29, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' - As described by ] on the discussion page, "I can see there being a good article on religion and mental illness, but as this page stands, it's POV, unencyclopedic in the style it's written, and it has no sources. My suggestion is that it be deleted, and the creator (or someone else) puts it on a user subpage and works on it there, until it's ready to face the public, as it were." Also, singling out schizotypy as a specific disorder to mention in the title is really quite odd as it's just one minor classification out of a whole range that would be important for a comparison between religion and psychology in general or mental disorders more specifically. If the article stayed around waiting for cleanup it would just get redirectede to a real article on the topic under a better name, and this title is so specific it's really unnecessary as a redirect as nobody would think to go looking for it instead of, say, ] or ] or whatnot. This article is a completely unsalvagable mess. ] 02:29, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| Comment--your outnumbered, dreamguy. guess that means consensus will be keep.] 02:33, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Concur with DreamGuy. <font color="green">]</font><font color="purple">]</font> 02:37, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Concur with DreamGuy. <font color="green">]</font><font color="purple">]</font> 02:37, August 7, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Merge''' with ]. Seems NPOV to me, not a ] (or, more correctly, a ]) against or for anything. But could easily be put inside a larger article, no need to break-out everything. ] 02:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | *'''Merge''' with ]. Seems NPOV to me, not a ] (or, more correctly, a ]) against or for anything. But could easily be put inside a larger article, no need to break-out everything. ] 02:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:58, 7 August 2005
Religion and schizotypy
This totally non-notable page is likley to be little more than an paean against religion. Hipocrite 01:42, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - sounds like the article could do with expansion though. Rob Church 01:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - this article is a work in progress. by the by, is Hipocrite a sockpuppet of DreamGuy? his workings almost EXACTLY DreamGuy's style. Gabrielsimon 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Keep- this acrticle could use some reworking, but its not non notable.Khulhy 02:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Could be a great article soon. CanadianCaesar 02:18, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - As described by User:SlimVirgin on the discussion page, "I can see there being a good article on religion and mental illness, but as this page stands, it's POV, unencyclopedic in the style it's written, and it has no sources. My suggestion is that it be deleted, and the creator (or someone else) puts it on a user subpage and works on it there, until it's ready to face the public, as it were." Also, singling out schizotypy as a specific disorder to mention in the title is really quite odd as it's just one minor classification out of a whole range that would be important for a comparison between religion and psychology in general or mental disorders more specifically. If the article stayed around waiting for cleanup it would just get redirectede to a real article on the topic under a better name, and this title is so specific it's really unnecessary as a redirect as nobody would think to go looking for it instead of, say, Religion and psychology or Religion and mental disorders or whatnot. This article is a completely unsalvagable mess. DreamGuy 02:29, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
Comment--your outnumbered, dreamguy. guess that means consensus will be keep.Gabrielsimon 02:33, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Concur with DreamGuy. android79 02:37, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
- Merge with schizophrenia. Seems NPOV to me, not a paean (or, more correctly, a Jeremiad) against or for anything. But could easily be put inside a larger article, no need to break-out everything. Sdedeo 02:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC)