Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biological evolution (disambiguation)


 * 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 speedy delete. Mo0 [ talk ] 06:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Biological evolution (disambiguation)
The article is a WP:FORK of evolution from a perspective of creationists. Completely unecessary disambig page. "Biological evolution" already redirects to Evolution; anyone looking for anything else is not looking for it under this name. Creating this page and then adding links to articles which have nothing to do with Biological evolution is absurd. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Quite so delete -- Ec5618 21:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Yet one more POV Fork... FeloniousMonk 21:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Let it toast on the radiators of Heck. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 21:39, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The evolution debate is already covered quite adequately in articles that people are actually likely to look for, like, oh, Theistic evolution and Intelligent design.  This "disambiguation" page serves no purpose. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 21:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * delete WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:FORK. You might have thought (for it is he) would have learned by now. &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 21:46, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete multiple redirects to the same old truth. ...dave souza 21:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not exactly a disambig page, and it's not exactly an article. Sadly delete.  Sadly because this is yet another offspring of what is IMHO a definitional debate - neither side really understands the other side's understanding of evolution.  Nor do they seem to want to.  Regards, Ben Aveling 22:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. While the continual disrespect paid to such views is troubling, I don't see the logic in this disambiguation page. Unless there's an article out there for 'Christian evolution models', 'Biblical evolution theories' or something of the sort, detailing the theories of evolutionary framework held by some Christians, this isn't needed.Trilemma 22:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Biological evolution already has a precise definition. Original research; POV fork. What is this now, the fifth time the author has created such POV forks? &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 22:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh God, another Ed Poor Axe-Grinding POV-Fork Special. Delete and put this one out of our misery. --Calton | Talk 00:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -Parallel or Together ? 01:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Bewildered: Come on, you guys, where is this info supposed to be, then? Ben, if "neither side really understands the other side's understanding of evolution" then where should the definitions of evolution go? Uncle Ed 02:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Bmdavll talk 03:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Deleted, per consensus. I'm starting to sense a "trend" here. ;-) Uncle Ed 03:31, 7 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.