Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epistemological nihilism


 * 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 to do anything (default to Keep). No consensus either to Keep or Merge, or if Merged, what the target should be. This is best taken to the talkpage for the time being. Black Kite 18:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Epistemological nihilism

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

Unnotable dictionary definition that at best deserves a mention in nihilism. Failed Prod. Collectonian (talk) 07:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - It's notable. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Crapload of print sources with chapters discussing the subject.  Saying that this should be merged to Nihilism is like saying Chemistry should be merged to Natural sciences, or that Buddhism should be merged to Religion.  Celarnor Talk to me  09:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Epistemology. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Nihilism. Mention might fit best in the section Self-consistency and paradox. Deor (talk) 11:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. This seems to mostly be an epithet used to describe positions that the writer is arguing against.  It is a fairly well known term, though, and as such this minimal stub has possibility for expansion.  - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'd gladly use this term to describe my position: It seems to fit better and carry less baggage than the alternatives "agnosticism" (suggesting lack of religion) and "skepticism" (so abused).  But I honestly don't know (hah!) if the term is notable.  — the Sidhekin (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge. We already have a section on this: Philosophical skepticism --S.dedalus (talk) 02:08, 10 May 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.