Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Objective validity of astrology: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:12, 9 June 2006 editJefffire (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers4,518 edits →[]← Previous edit Revision as of 16:16, 9 June 2006 edit undoMarskell (talk | contribs)22,422 editsm →[]Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
===]=== ===]===
Fundamental concern is that this is a POV-fork used as a platform to present questionable, obscure astrological research that would not pass ], ], and ] on a more frequented page. The one entry here that has received suffecient attention to warrant Wiki-coverage is the ], which has its own page. The main ] article has a ] which can be expanded somewhat to include any other critical points. We have an ] to boot, which we can use if we really need comparative analysis. The page is also a gawdawful mess which is constantly being reverted over. '''Delete'''. ] 16:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Fundamental concern is that this is a POV-fork used as a platform to present questionable, obscure astrological research that would not pass ], ], and ] on a more frequented page. The one entry here that has received sufficient attention to warrant Wiki-coverage is the ], which has its own page. The main ] article has a ] which can be expanded somewhat to include any other critical points. We have an ] to boot, which we can use if we really need comparative analysis. The page is also a gawdawful mess which is constantly being reverted over. '''Delete'''. ] 16:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


*'''Delete'''. Only the Mars effect is of any notability in this page and it has its own article. The rest is built upon papers from unreliable journals. ] 16:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete'''. Only the Mars effect is of any notability in this page and it has its own article. The rest is built upon papers from unreliable journals. ] 16:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:16, 9 June 2006

Objective validity of astrology

Fundamental concern is that this is a POV-fork used as a platform to present questionable, obscure astrological research that would not pass WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV on a more frequented page. The one entry here that has received sufficient attention to warrant Wiki-coverage is the Mars effect, which has its own page. The main astrology article has a section which can be expanded somewhat to include any other critical points. We have an astrology and astronomy to boot, which we can use if we really need comparative analysis. The page is also a gawdawful mess which is constantly being reverted over. Delete. Marskell 16:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete. Only the Mars effect is of any notability in this page and it has its own article. The rest is built upon papers from unreliable journals. Jefffire 16:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)