This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Joyous 00:04, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Lengthy and entirely non-NPOV paranoid rant with no basis in fact. -- Karada 09:43, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Delete, silliness. I hope it's a hoax. Shimeru 11:38, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
This technology has come a long way, even foil hats are rendered ineffective. Quick, delete before the Trilateral Commission finds out that we've seen it! iMeowbot~Mw 12:03, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)- Hang on, the version of the article from 21 November is a lot more reasonable, displaying healthy skepticism. In this form I'd keep, since it does explain what the tin foil crowd are talking about. I've gone ahead and put that version back for now. iMeowbot~Mw 12:17, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep the reverted page. Rje 13:51, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep the succinct, NPoV version, it's helpful. Wyss 23:15, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep with iMeowbot's revert. GRider\talk 23:29, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep reverted page. --Viriditas | Talk 11:32, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep NPOV version. Megan1967 02:45, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep it. —RaD Man (talk) 11:27, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.