Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forward thinking


 * 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 speedy delete. &mdash; RHaworth 22:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Forward thinking

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested PROD. Seems to be pure, unadulterated original research, prohibited in our WP:NOR policy. Was considering a G1 speedy deletion, but couldn't quite bring myself to take it there. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research per WP:NOR, no significant coverage of term online in WP:Reliable sources. Empty Buffer (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Speedy delete would have been okay. Original essay. Carrite (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR with no potential for backing sources. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is very close to patent nonsense: Forward Thinking = The Animal is a Duck and it will fly or walk, or The Animal is a Duck and it will not fly or walk, or The Animal is not a Duck and it will not fly or walk. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. This most definitely seems to be original research judging from Google results. sdornan (talk) 16:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's an original essay (WP:NOR), and there isn't much research into this subject. And not written in a very encyclopedic manner, in my personal opinion (A=B=C=D=E? Really?). Thank you, -Liwolf1 (talk) 16:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research/essay. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Snow delete - Nonsensical OR/essay. P. D. Cook  Talk to me! 17:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's ok to delete, why debate it? (WP:NOR), and it was submitted to the system at 18:30, 8 August 2007, and been in the the system for almost 3 years with very little constructive dialogue from very few users...  in my personal opinion it should be deleted. Thanks, -Davidvalin (talk)
 * Speedy Delete, Per WP:CSD or WP:CSD or WP:CSD (It's true that G1 isn't a good criterion.) Maashatra11 (talk) 20:12, 22 July 2010 (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.