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.
JForget 00:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)reply
lack of notability
jadrian (
talk) 00:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
JForget 23:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. There is also the question of whether
Image streaming should be deleted as well. Both seem to be professional puff.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 11:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC).reply
Delete. Does not pass
WP:PROF and does not have sufficient third-party non-academic citations to pass
WP:BIO more generally. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 16:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. Per nomination and the above comments. Rather sad, really, for no study has come out to declare in bald terms the utter fallaciousness of the claims made by him and his ilk. But who knows? Perhaps one day a study might vindicate him. Until then: trash it. The same seems to go for
image streaming as well; I couldn't find any information save for the
rabbit hole to some book that I would be required to purchase...—
argumzioϝ 04:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)reply
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.