- 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 delete. Punkmorten 13:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Original Research abakharev 09:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- No vote - please explain why you consider this original research. Proto///type 09:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not OR, just unverifiable Spakfilla. Jammo (SM247) 09:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete complete bollocks. Danny Lilithborne 10:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:Complete Bollocks and WP:V. --Coredesat 11:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleteper above, is not Realogy. feydey 14:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. At best, this should be a redirect to Rheology. Inner Earth 16:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete on the basis that it returns precisely 0 google hits. Tyrenius 16:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as Falsonomy. WP:NOR, WP:NFT. If this wasn't "made up in class one day" then the Realogist wasted a decade of thought. Barno 23:17, 22 June 2006 (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.