Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dream Interpretations


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Dream Interpretations

 * – (View AfD) (View log · AfD statistics)

Contested prod. Orginal prod comments: "Seems to be WP:Original Research, an essay published by the user. Specifically WP:Synth, and included e-mail address suggests this is an advertisement."

Prod was contested with no reason provided. Another editor has since removed the e-mail from the article, yet it still seems to be an implied advertisement per "These are only examples of interpretations which I have already given to some of my clients." in the text, although this is not blatant as it may be taken from another source, as there are references present.

On balance though, doesn't seem like the kind of topic an encyclopedia would cover even after clean-up to remove synthesis. Thoughts? Taelus (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research and an essay of personal musings: For thousands of years now, dreams still remain as an ancient mystery. In my attempt to answer my curiosity to find out if some dream experts have common interpretations to a specific dream, I went through different book stores and surfed into the internet to gather facts on the matter using related reviews. Then redirect to dream interpretation. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:40, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - More-or-less an Essay consisting of Original research. Well, there are some references, but it's mostly OR. The topic may be deserving of an article, but not much is saveagable in its present form. Lord Spongefrog,  (Talk to me, or I'll eat your liver!)  16:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOR. POV essay on Dream interpretation written entirely in first person per WP:NOT. MuffledThud (talk) 12:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: An essay. Joe Chill (talk) 15:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, no redirect required.Vulcan&#39;s Forge (talk) 00:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Sort of an interesting essay about one person's way of thinking and logical connections — I don't think I've ever dreamed of lice crawling on me — but an essay nonetheless. Mandsford (talk) 20:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This is an essay giving the author's point of view, it is not encyclopedic. Mah favourite (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2009 (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.