Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intellect amplification


 * 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. Yunshui 雲 水 13:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Intellect amplification

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:GNG. Neither reference mentions the subject by name. Also see WP:NOTESSAY. ubiquity (talk) 19:39, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 02:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete I couldn't find a mention of this concept in either reference. It reads as WP:OR to me. Liz  Read! Talk! 11:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per Liz or redirect to intelligence amplification - 14:33, 23 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Gerard (talk • contribs)
 * Delete This has a strong original research aroma as submitted to Wikipedia with multiple wikilinks from arguably unconnected articles. I follow the literature on intellect and on human and animal and artificial intelligence closely, and this is not an encyclopedic topic found in  reliable sources or mentioned in any of the relevant WikiProjects. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 14:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Obvious WP:OR via synthesis of given sources. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:17, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with the others who have commented here. --Krelnik (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:SYN and complete bollocks. Guy (Help!) 21:44, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not sure there is even enough to warrant a redirect to Douglas Engelbart or Intelligence amplification. - Location (talk) 09:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect to Intelligence amplification, which this is, pretense or not, related to, and which is a natural search term for the same. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 22:04, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Really obviously non-notable crackpot theory - let's not waste any more time on this. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:48, 25 July 2015 (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.