- 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 of the debate was article sent to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. howcheng {chat} 22:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, non-sense, perhaps. Rich Farmbrough 22:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge anything worth keeping to Jean Baudrillard and leave as a redirect.Dlyons493 Talk 14:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]- Delete Both this and polythought look like they've come from [1] - that either didn't exist or I missed it when looking at Monothought originally. That makes them both OR as well. Should put polythought on Afd as well. Dlyons493 Talk 14:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect per Dlyons493. --Squiddy 10:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per Dlyons493. Stifle 01:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- comment it might make sense to merge/redirect with/to polythought, but the polythought article seems to be copied from an article that was published online. --JWSchmidt 05:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD debate is being relisted in order to prompt a more thorough consensus. Please place new discussion below this line. Ξxtreme Unction|yakkity yak 19:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - copyvio from this site. --Cyde Weys votetalk 19:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The current contents of the article are a copyright violation and the topic is of limited interest. The original author of the material that is currently in monothought and polythought is apparently Claude Rifat (also known as Claude de Contrecoeur), a biologist who has some recognition on the internet[2], [3]. Maybe some day an admirer will make Claude Rifat. --JWSchmidt 20:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not only copyvio, but what hits there are outside Wiki mirrors are for user handles and such; this appears to be one person's idea which is not (yet) widely accepted. Or even noticed, frankly. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 21:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polythought as both are (a) copy & paste from similar sources and (b) apparentl monographs; there is little if any verifiable evidence that these are conepts widely discussed in the literature. Or discussed at all, as far as I can see... - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 21:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable, original research, copyvio --Quarl 02:11, 29 December 2005 (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.