Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coldcreation Theory

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 - blanked by creator. -- RHaworth 08:54, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coldcreation Theory

Contested prod. Original research advancing a new scientific theory. --Finngall ^talk 22:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating a similar article containing some of the same material:

Delete as OR. JJL 23:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as OR by synthesis. There are lots of refs, but they all look like support for specific issues within the article, not the idea of the article itself. Need some very specific citations for the actual "coldcreation" theory. DMacks 23:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 00:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. A very long article with no references to back up anything, no equations, no reputable scientists supporting or even just commenting on it - no chance. It doesn't even say who came up with it in the first place. WP:OR for sure. Clarityfiend 00:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on both; it does not appear that there is any way to save these totally naive articles.DGG 01:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The creator of the article has blanked the page, and is asking for advice on how to write a properly sourced article. See User:Coldcreation for details.--mikeu 01:27, 12 June 2007 (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.