Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Applied Consciousness Sciences


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Applied Consciousness Sciences

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a long article but nothing in it provides even marginal evidence of notability, and the information in the article is not verifiable using reputable sources. The one source that actually uses the term "Applied Consciousness Sciences" is a self-published book. Looie496 (talk) 16:22, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions.  — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

9/18/2011 The article was not yet complete. Thank you for your feedback. Today added references to the different topics covered in the article. We're looking forward to the next round of feedback so we may continually improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlomonsanto (talk • contribs) 06:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - The sources show virtually no mention of the phrase "Applied Consciousness Sciences". I see a couple of minor mentions here and there, but whatever it is (and I cannot really tell what it is) it could probably just be mentioned in some other relevant WP article such as neuropsychology or consciousness or cognitive science etc. --Noleander (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - "ACS which isn't considered a science as per the definition of the scientific community, is a collective name for a multiplicity of different holistic approaches that follow their own methods, techniques and theories"... well I'm glad that's got that cleared up!Tigerboy1966 (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2011 (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.