- 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. JohnCD (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Brain potential (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not sure what this article is even supposed to be about. It seems like pseudoscience/original research - it originally cited the 10% of brain myth as a fact, and although that has been corrected, the general feel of the article still seems to be along those original lines. It also incorporates what looks like advertising for various "brain fitness" sites. fraggle (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as original research and spam. DarkAudit (talk) 15:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It is OR, and all the refs are not RS. Angryapathy (talk) 15:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per all above comments. some links are to neuroscience material that if useful can be used in real articles, if anyone cares to try. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Poor text and referencing (both the quality and formatting). Nothing useful in this article to be merged. Materialscientist (talk) 10:03, 25 November 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.