Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IEvo


 * 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 &mdash; Caknuck (talk) 07:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

IEvo

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This doesn't appear to be a notable or widely-disseminated scientific theory. JavaTenor (talk) 17:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable, looks like it could be a hoax. No mention of the theory, the journal or either of the people named in the article on Google or Yahoo. --Snigbrook ( talk ) 18:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can't find Connie Furmzorçis, who is referenced as the proposed theory maker, anywhere.  iEvolution has many references but all to business oriented articles.  High probability that it is a hoax.--Pmedema (talk) 18:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Obvious hoax or non-notable, laughable attempt at science.  Someguy1221 (talk) 23:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. My bet, too, is that this is a hoax. Even if not, it's clearly non-notable. Tim Ross ·talk  00:54, 8 December 2007 (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.