Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-aging trance

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 merge to Aubrey de Gray. (X! · talk) · @183 · 03:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-aging trance

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Neologism, references are exclusively to articles by De Grey and responses/reviews thereof, no evidence of any currency as a term, or use by other sources Sumbuddi (talk) 22:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to ~~Ageing~~Aubrey de Gray. This theory has received coverage from reliable, secondary sources, and should not be deleted simply because it is unique. I suggest including it in a short paragraph in the ~~Ageing~~Aubrey de Gray article. Yoninah (talk) 22:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just discovered the Aubrey de Grey article. This subject should be merged there, too. Yoninah (talk) 22:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing substantial to merge, just one of his idiosyncratic catch-phrases. The many references seem altogether general and not specific to the subject--Yoninah, what part of what references by a third party discusses this specifically?" Not denial of one's aging in general, but the specific use of it within his body of work? DGG ( talk ) 03:06, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DGG: You're right, the references on the page are altogether general, but I was clicking on some of the links under "find sources" (above) and found "pro-aging trance" mentioned on CNN and other websites. What I was trying to say above was that it surprises me that this term is not included on Aubrey de Gray's page. If it is not a widely accepted theory, it should at least be mentioned on de Gray's page, since he created it. Yoninah (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Aubrey de Gray per Yoninah. mkehrt (talk) 01:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per Yoninah. --Green06 (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2010 (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.