Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glacial respiration


 * 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. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 22:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Glacial respiration

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

This article is poorly written, making it difficult to ascertain the notability of the subject. For instance, is this a fringe theory, or a notable part of Mayan legend? It does receive some Google hits, but none of those sources appear to be notable or worthy of reference. I'm hoping this AfD will draw the attention of an expert.  Flying  Toaster  04:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * still editing the page WillOakland, Baileypalblue . Mandsford,-Atmoz 74.47.194.235 Erwin85Bot, I am a professional geologist, and this is an organization of simple common knowledge into an environmental pathway. I am still editing the work and have not finished the post. -H2onE2 (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as original research. It's entirely the work of Marse, who has been spamming his bizarre doomsday book all over the internet. WillOakland (talk) 06:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as COATRACK article that tries to pass the theorist's modern ideas onto ancient Mayans. Baileypalblue (talk) 07:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Oakland that this is a promotion of the www.h2one2.com website and a book by B. Billy Marse, professional geologist. I think that as 2012 gets closer, the ancient Mayans are going to be mentioned more than ever before. Mandsford (talk) 14:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Unverifiable original research. No reliable sources cover this topic besides the author's website and the spamming around the Internet. -Atmoz (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Self-published original research of the most crankoid sort. Posted by the author who is his only reference.  Sigh.   Anon, 20 February 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.194.235 (talk) 20:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Clearly OR, and I'm not happy about the author's article on his talk page at User talk:H2onE2. dougweller (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete For the same reasons as mentioned above, original research and advertising. --McSly (talk) 17:25, 23 February 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.