Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. Francis Hitching


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

J. Francis Hitching

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Obscure advocate of WP:FRINGE positions. Biography section is wholly unsourced, Evolution section sourced almost-exclusively to his own book, with a couple of creationist reviews of it (hardly WP:RS) and a bare mention of his book cited to a New Scientist article (of unknown authorship and title) being the only third parties. No reliable coverage apparent through find. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * keep article:) Liveintheforests (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Many sources can be found on Google books about Hitching there are already quite a few on the page, Hitching is notable. - Do not delete article. Hrafn is a militant religious guy who deletes evolution articles on wikipedia which oppose his own view. He is not neutral. Liveintheforests (talk) 17:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to also point out the article has been on wikipedia since may 2006!! - No idea why it has to be deleted now?? It's been up for nearly 6 years!Hitching is a notable figure. Liveintheforests (talk) 18:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I wasn't able to find any reliable sources to validate any of the claims in the article. Also, I have to say that attacking another user's religious beliefs is not a good thing to do, and would suggest other editors refrain from this. Wildthing61476 (talk) 19:25, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It will doubtless relieve you to know that Litf has been blocked a week for making such attacks. KillerChihuahua ?!?Advice 19:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable, per nom. Dbrodbeck (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Contains no WP:RS that demonstrates that WP:N is satisfied through WP:AUTHOR or WP:BK. Qworty (talk) 22:18, 24 May 2011 (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.