Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abstract atomism


 * 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. Owen&times; &#9742;  00:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Abstract atomism
Vanity article to promote a theory of a doctoral student named Jeffrey Grupp. His vanity bio Jeffrey Grupp was speed deleted. Delete Wile E. Heresiarch 07:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete; non-notable philosophy and self-promotional. &mdash; HorsePunchKid &rarr;&#x9F9C; 2005-12-11 07:38:26Z
 * Delete vanity. The referenced article was just published. Gazpacho 09:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for vanity. Publishing theories of time in Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies doesn't provide proper peer review. Rasmus (talk) 12:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - theories of the universe that rely on philosophy and religion rather than science have no place in an encyclopedia. --Cyde Weys talkcontribs 20:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree with the above. Philosophical and theological theories are encyclopedic if they're prominent enough. This one isn't, though. Delete. --Agamemnon2 06:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. PJM 02:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - notability not established AustinZ 21:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 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.