Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enigmism


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 01:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Enigmism

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

A not notable philosophy for which I find no reliable sources with non trivial coverage and providing verifiable information. The creator notes on the article talk page, "It is prevalent in the village I was raised in, unfortunately they do not have much Internet access, that is why I am creating references to it on the web. At one point every belief system was being logged onto the web for the first time." Thus this asserts only local or regional prevalence at best. The source is a myspace page. I was astounded to see initial Ghits of 13,400, but this [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GWYA_enUS311US234&q=Enigmism&start=10&sa=N only yields 15 which are unique. None of them are relevant to this usage.] This was originally tagged for speedy deletion as nonsense, but that does not really apply. There is an enigmism.com, apparently available "to let." The article cites a book,(Morality through Enigmism: The Inevitable war of Identity by Aiden Gentia Uncertain Press. Sri Lanka, 1995.) but I find no hits on Worldcat for author or subject at Worldcat. Dloh cierekim  15:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Original research, promoting a fringe theory, without demonstrating its notability or citing reliable, verifiable sources. The tone of the article leads me to suspect it may be a hoax, or an attempt to make a point, perhaps about interracial relationships (or 'mating', to use the author's delicate expression). Moreover, there may be a conflict of interest, based on the similarity of the page author's handle to the name of the alleged author of the only printed source. This may also mean that the article is an attempt to promote the book itself, in which case the page should be speedily deleted as spam. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete for reasons above pablo  ::  ... hablo ... 16:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. ArcAngel (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete for reasons given. simply not notable. Hornsofthebull (talk) 16:40, 30 January 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.