Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Continual renewal


 * 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 00:06, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Continual renewal
Either nonsense, copyvio, or original research. Probably the latter. Stifle 15:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. &mdash;Crypticbot (operator) 15:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems like original research.  I got no match for any several-word strings that I tried on google to indicate copyvio from the web. -Meegs 16:15, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, WP:NOR. PJM 16:40, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It reads like a concept paper for a new religious philosophy. Some guy 19:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete; seems more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. *Dan T.* 21:05, 4 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.