Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forty Six and Two

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-09 09:31Z

Forty Six and Two (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Looks to be a neologism regarding a pseudoscientific theory. Tool writing a song about it doesn't necessarily make it notable. Only reference is a high school paper (there was an UrbanDictionary reference, too, but I removed that for obvious reasons). I would have just speedied this except there wasn't really any criteria to do it with. JuJube 19:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NEO (and possibly WP:NFT, if the source is a high-school paper). One source isn't enough to show that this theory is widespread. Walton monarchist89 19:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I have a low tolerance for undersourced pseudoscientific nonsense, especially when it isn't stated clearly in the article how nonsensical it is. —David Eppstein 05:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Agree with the other editors here.--Atemperman 15:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge information like this would be better if it was mentioned on a article that has to do with higher intellagence or chromosnes Maverick423 17:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete. This is simply rambling pseudoscience. --Tunheim 22:39, 8 February 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.