Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conscious action theory


 * 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. Cabayi (talk) 08:12, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Conscious action theory

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The main purpose of the article seems to be to promote the idea (and book) of one person. The sources cited are written by the person in question, and a search finds nothing better (mostly just booksellers!). Fails WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment For info, there is also a Draft:Wolfgang Baer, previously declined at AfC, on the person behind the concept to which this AfD relates. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:26, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Fringe speculation that has not attracted enough attention, academic or otherwise, to be noteworthy speculation. The lengthy pile of primary sources includes things that look like scholarly journals but aren't, like Physics Essays and Quantum Biosystems, which ... whoo boy. Come for the hydrodynamic quantum field and the musical structure of consciousness, stay for the it's-totally-not-creationism! XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Lol, whoever wrote the article is not even trying to demonstrate notability, or to pretend the article is anything other than a promotion of Wolfgang Baer. Tercer (talk) 19:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not for self-publication.--ReyHahn (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete This is probably not really notable. There is a book that was published by Routledge, a major academic publisher, but it is a very new book (2018) and not widely reviewed. I found one review, but there isn't enough out there yet. &lt; Atom ( Anomalies ) 18:19, 4 March 2021 (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.