Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative Cosmology Group
- 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. Cirt (talk) 09:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alternative Cosmology Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Not a notable group has not received the third-party notice required for our inclusion guidelines for fringe groups. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Letter to the Scientific Community. The article is essentially trumpeting original research and has no place in an mainstream encyclopedia. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not notable ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The existence of this group does not disprove the hypothesis that the set of notable Big Bang denialists is empty. That they have been able to organize at least two conferences gave me pause, but ultimately there is no way to write an article without reliable non-trivial coverage. I did find a couple (disparaging, but those are fine for WP:N) blog mentions, so maybe they are on the make. - Eldereft (cont.) 04:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep/merge The group is getting mentions in places such as Forbes magazine. If there is too little to say about them yet, the content might be merged into an article such as Non-standard cosmology since it is a useful search term. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2008 (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.