Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecozoic


 * 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 No consensus. Deathphoenix ʕ 03:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Ecozoic
This and The Great Story are up for deletion as non-notable pseudoscientific mystical flapdoodle, and possible original research, since no really reliable sources are cited. The Great Story article mentions lots of notable thinkers, but doesn't cite any of their work, because these people didn't write about "the Great Story". They wrote about other teleological philosophies, but these often have their own articles. "Ecozoic" is not a recognised geological era, nor a term in evolutionary biology or any indeed any established field other than "Great Story Studies". Byrgenwulf 13:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak keep 20,000 google hits for ecozoic, apparently it's a notable New Age concept.--Nydas 18:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is not suitable material, it is pretending to be science but really does miss the point of what a wikipedia article ahould contain. Google hits should not count for suitability.--Mr Maxim 20:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--Peta 04:32, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Must keep An encyclopaedia is supposed to have an entry on each coined term that does not belong in a dictionary. In just twenty minutes I could find the term being coined and described on ABC NewsRadio, in a paper on a university web site, etc. and I put just a few references in the article; there will be more - I hardly looked. It proves a lack of seriousness to put up an Afd for non-notable or (here even and) original research without even trying to find a proper reference. Should WP:NPOV not apply to a presentation for Afd? I do not care whether the topic is pseudoscientific mystical flapdoodle, else we must erase either Catholicism or Islam - or would that have to be both? — SomeHuman 3 Oct2006 19:13 (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.