Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Learning by Osmosis


 * 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. JForget 00:07, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Learning by Osmosis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I declined this article's G3 speedy. Apparently it's a hoax, but I don't know enough about the subject to decide. Is it a hoax? Should it be deleted? Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 14:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm the one who speedied it -- the article is sort of amusing, but everything in it is absurd. Professor Van Nostrum!  The references are deliberately formatted to make them hard to look up -- they exist, but have absolutely nothing to do with the topic, for example  is one of them. Looie496 (talk) 14:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Should have been speedied as patent nonsense. D. J. Cartwright (talk) 14:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Maybe we should sleep on it. Mandsford (talk) 14:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Hoax. Joe Chill (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a pure speculation. Materialscientist (talk) 10:27, 13 October 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.