Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death and Adjustment Hypotheses


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Death and Adjustment Hypotheses

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

vanity text for single book lacking evidence of notability Mangoe (talk) 18:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete -- self-published book, not notable, article was largely written by the book's author. Looie496 (talk) 18:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yep, pretty blatant advertising of OR and book. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone else. No hard evidence of notability. Moreschi (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete indeed as not noted by the scientific community, and hardly outside of it. Fram (talk) 07:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Verify and keep/delete -- Why not verify it from the journal Death Studies, whether it is really reviewed positively as a scientific work. In fact, one review is complete and another is under process. Robert Neimeyer, The Editor can tell best!Shoovrow (talk) 15:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Shoovrow is the author of the book. We shouldn't use a review that hasn't yet been published, regardless of anything the editor of the journal might say.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:46, 24 October 2008 (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.