Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cognitive style

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. Golbez 08:16, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Cognitive style
More un-notable "Period Eye" related mumbo jumbo. The article's text deffinately needs to be deleted IMO, maybe a brand new article or a redirect to cognition in its place?... Blackcats 08:46, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with above regarding possible redirect after deletion. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 12:00, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Just repeats the unstructured facts from Period_eye. --Oneliner 12:27, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all this period eye cruft as personal essays. Non-notable, original "research" Wikibofh 14:08, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: Original research. I'm not really in favor of a redirect, as "cognitive style," when not used by this author, seems to be a favorite term for the pot crackers out there who are trying to exist on the Astral plane. Geogre 14:53, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete along the lines of everything else this user has done: Original research, POV, bias. jglc | t | c 17:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .