Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Streetlight effect

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. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 19:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Looks like original research/pseudo-science. Wickethewok 02:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOR --Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 02:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete-Turn this OR off like a streetlight affected by superduper human EM fields. Night Gyr 02:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Much as I'm a skeptic about paranormal effects like this, if there were some references I might change my vote. --Ginkgo100 03:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - something this dumb-sounding definitely needs reputable sources if it is going to be kept, and I doubt that any are forthcoming. dbtfz^talk 03:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment No vote at this time. I saw a reference to this a few years ago, except it was called streetlight interference (SLI). Of course, the reference was in Fortean Times, which is hardly peer reviewed, but it may have been a secondary source. I'll browse through the back issues and see if I can find it. --Joelmills 04:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Street light interference, and then probably move to Streetlight interference, a more proper title. This site [1] seems to give some evidence of ongoing paranormal research in this area. --Joelmills 04:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/move per Joelmills. —porges_(talk) 06:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Joelmills, but I'd like to see at least some sort of verification as well. Darquis 07:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete but here's a Straight Dope article on it: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_047.html Шизомби 02:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I'd say merge as per JoelMills, but there's nothing really here. And it's never a good sign when the article is signed, but signed by two people? --Deville (Talk) 02:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Neologism/Original research. I'm thinking it has to be a joke, except it didn't seem funny. Peter Grey 05:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Deville. -- ReyBrujo 17:37, 1 May 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.