Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Half of humanity is alive now


 * 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 of the discussion was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Half of humanity is alive now
"Currently accepted by many people." So? And does this concept really need to be explained? --Macarion 20:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I am not one of the "many people" who accept it. I maintain that all of humanity is alive now, as a dead body is not a human being. I could accept that half of humanity is awake now. Delete. Interesting and perhaps notable phenomenon, but not deserving of a separate article. Herostratus 20:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete It isn't really deserving of its own article, is it? I'd say at least 95% of all Half Life gamers who ever lived are still alive. 0% of everyone who met Shakespeare are still alive. I mean, where does this end? (Answer: here) Folks should go to World population and make their own minds up. --DaveG12345 21:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete borderline speedy, it doesn't even try to make sense. Danny Lilithborne 22:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: unverifiable and unencyclopaedic. I especially dislike the meaningless note on scientists (>99% of all nanotechnologists who ever were are now alive, but so what?). How many humans have ever been depends on how long humanity's been around (and trust me, it's at least 6000 years). I like Arthur C Clarke's prologue to his novel 2001, in which he says that by the year 2000, there would be 30 ghosts for every living person: a humbling thought. --die Baumfabrik 23:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Not even half of this article will be alive upon facing this log. Delete as original research. --Slgr @ ndson (page - messages - contribs) 23:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete &mdash; This argument is covered much better on the Doomsday argument page. &mdash; RJH (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2006 (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.