Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cosmic ancestry


 * 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. ✗ plicit  23:47, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Cosmic ancestry

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This is Hoyle's and Wickramasinghe's particular version of their fringe panspermia nonsense. The only sources on this are primary sources, from either Hoyle or Wickramasinghe, or close collaborators. The rest is original WP:SYNTH. Fails WP:N &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete A search on scholar does not indicate that the concept has gained any sort of traction outside of the Panspermiaverse of fringe scholars dedicated to the topic. The relationship between panspermia advocates and theistic evolution can be discussed in the main panspermia article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree. I don't know of any serious scientist who takes this stuff seriously. Athel cb (talk) 11:38, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - I looked at the citations and those that are not from the main authors appear to be related to horizontal gene transfer but used with WP:SYNTHesis since they are not really about this cosmology. This article was sometimes boldly redirected to panspermia in the past and when I look at older revisions none were sufficiently independently sourced.  — Paleo  Neonate  – 18:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable fringe piffle that lies about what its sources say. It claims There are also many instances of genes detected in species that have no known current use for them and cites a paper that identifies the likely functional role of the genes it investigates (Hox-like pattern formation during development). Synthesis and wankery. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is WP:FRINGE content and lacks notability. Aldebarium (talk) 22:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: per above. Praemonitus (talk) 18:54, 11 February 2022 (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.