Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regenerative Thought Programming – RTP

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. MBisanz ^talk 14:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regenerative Thought Programming – RTP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable subject, no reliable sources. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Essentially pure OR, no sources in the article and a plane google search gives nothing[1]. Falis WP:V and, most certainly, WP:N. Nsk92 (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. OR Essay. Operating (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Author made the ludicrous claim on my talk page that the article is "full of sources and references" but I calls it OR. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Hilarious WP:OR. VG ☎ 13:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless Lewis Harrison is found notable, in which case merge/redirect. - Eldereft (cont.) 17:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless it can be merged to Lewis Harrison. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per WP:OR. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:56, 30 September 2008 (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.