Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Association of Electronic Voice Phenomena


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 07:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

American Association of Electronic Voice Phenomena

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Existence of this article constitutes undue weight. It also seems like an end-run around NPOV, avoiding the necessary inclusion of the sceptical perspective at electronic voice phenomenon. Only one formally independent source, which does not give it much attention. Google and Factiva do not turn up anything reliable, all mentions appear to be in the blogs and websites of proponents of EVP, a large proportion of whom appear from their sites to be cranks. Guy (Help!) 10:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete The criticism section has been improved which means that the article is not completely one-sided. However, I was unable to find any reliable sources that dealt with the AA-EVP. Due to a lack of sources, notability is really not asserted in the article. -- Cyrus      Andiron   12:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless independent, reliable sources can be found. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Edison 20:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Reluctant Keep - The involvement of the two directors of the AA-EVP in the promotion of the film "White Noise" (2005) earned it many references by mainstream sources . Since one of the org's principals has been active in POV pushing on WP, recommend the article be carefully monitored for neutrality. - LuckyLouie 00:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete As far as i can tell, the person is merely being identified as a member of the association, the links are not talking about the association. This therefore does not count as non-trivial mentions. The association has an external link on the Evp page, which is as it should be. DGG 02:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It's not notable because it lacks sources, re everyone's arguments above. Nick mallory 14:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails stated criteria at WP:N, "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject and each other." Some of the material could be folded into the EVP article. Raymond Arritt 00:13, 19 May 2007 (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.