Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argument from evolution (2nd nomination)

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 merge into Evidence of evolution. Please note that several !votes in this AfD were discounted per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. -- Steel 18:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argument from evolution (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This article was submitted for deletion last month but wound up being kept by "no consensus". The phrase "argument from evolution" is used to mean a variety of things, as discussed on the article's talk page and as revealed by a Google search. But this article doesn't discuss any of those things; rather, it consists primarily of arguments for evolution, as opposed to arguments from evolution. As such, it seems to duplicate various other Wikipedia articles, such as Evidence of evolution and sections of Intelligent design. I am recommending a delete due to the mismatch between the title and content. --Metropolitan90 16:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree that this looks like a rehash of things that are probably better covered elsewhere, and the content doesn't really match the title. This isn't such a vital subject that we need to keep a bad article in place in hopes that someone will clean it up. --Brianyoumans 18:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - likely started as a simple typo ("from" instead of "for") and now has take on a life of its own. Already plenty of better pages to cover this topic.Glendoremus 18:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, if you look at the page history it didn't originate as a typo. Guettarda 04:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Any useful information should be moved to Evidence of evolution, but there is no need to have two articles covering the same topic. TSO1D 19:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • If any of the content is merged we can't deleted according to the GFDL. Guettarda 04:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and merge any info that's not covered as well in Evidence of evolution ot Intelligent design. delldot | talk 21:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As per above - it's a violation of the GFDL to delete after merging. Guettarda 04:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep just needs a title change. This is a fair argument that has somehow escaped the attention of the know-nothings.DGG 03:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • What should the title be changed to? --Metropolitan90 04:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge into evidence of evolution — Article reads like a personal essay, even if it is supposedly substantiated by references. The subject is already covered elsewhere.— RJH (talk) 20:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - this is notable and verifiable; if anything it should be merged into creation-evolution debate, not evidence of evolution, since the article is about arguments in favour of evolution relative to creationist arguments. Guettarda 04:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge any non-redundant content to Evidence of evolution. As discussed in the previous AfD the actual "argument from evolution" is at best a neologism and at this point almost nothing in the article discusses that argument. JoshuaZ 04:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per JoshuaZ •Jim62sch• 10:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Octopus-Hands 00:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Evidence of evolution. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/Rename - rename to Arguments for evolution. It would be a waste to delete it.  The Transhumanist   13:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge whatever's not redundant, to wherever it can go. — coelacan talk — 05:25, 8 December 2006 (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.