This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gnixon (talk | contribs) at 18:57, 7 August 2008 (→Argument from poor design). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:57, 7 August 2008 by Gnixon (talk | contribs) (→Argument from poor design)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Argument from poor design
- Argument from poor design (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Nominating for deletion because the name of the article consitutes original research. The phrase "argument from poor design" does not appear in any cited source, gets zero hits on Google Scholar, and gets only hits that derive from Misplaced Pages on Google Web. Looie496 (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - This is a well-written article, but it should probably be renamed to dysteleological argument (currently a redirect), which seems to be more widely used, at least according to google hits. It has some general citations but could use more specific citations for each point to satisfy WP:NOR. Amazinglarry (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep and rename per amazinglarry. The article could use some better sources however.Nrswanson (talk) 17:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment This article has been in AfD before (sorry, I don't think I marked it correctly when submitting). It was saved for the reasons given above, but nothing ever happened. It seems that an actual deletion is the only thing that will change this. Note that "dysteleological argument" also gets zero Google Scholar hits, although it does get apparently independent web hits. Looie496 (talk) 17:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep, notable argument against the existence of God, well written article. JIP | Talk 18:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Delete OR, not notable. Gnixon (talk) 18:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)