Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omnitheism (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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omnitheism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Unreferenced soapboxing about a religion found to be non-notable in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omnitheism. Alksub 07:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's true that the article needs serious improvement in order to meet WP standards. However, the article has already been repeatedly deleted, causing replacements that are less rounded, researched & referenced than the previous attempts. It is true that omnitheism is a relatively new term, but there are reasons for its emergence at this time, and I think those need to be contextualized. I would like to access the version just prior to this one and merge the information, adding some references and "missing links" in the information flow in order to meet a higher quality standard. I believe that all of the concerns are valid, and I believe that they can all be addressed. Mahalo!--Laualoha 02:49, 2 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laualoha (talk • contribs)
• Delete. Questionable notability. Even if notable, the article should go as per WP:NOT#DICDEF.--Michig 07:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - neologism, total lack of sourcing, non notable --Oxymoron⁸³ 07:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:BOLLOCKS. --Agamemnon2 07:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as neologism. Keb25 08:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Might wanna "salt the earth" to prevent recreation as it seems like this is the second AfD that it has gone through and the first time the result was "delete". nat^tang 09:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not notable, soapboxing, neologism, completely unreferenced. Salting might be appropriate here. Hut 8.5 11:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Burn and Salt - Article has already been deleted. NN neogolism... Spawn Man 12:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• If you love something, set it free because it wasn't meant to be. Salting is an extreme measure, but this greeting card is extremely inappropriate here. Get the salt shaker. Mandsford 12:27, 29 September 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.