Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Near-Extinction evolution theory


 * 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 debate was let the talk hash it out. This doesn't appear to be original research to me; a merge has been proposed, and I think someone better acquainted with the topic should figure this out. If it doesn't pan out, it can be redirected or brought back to AfD. Johnleemk | Talk 16:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Near-Extinction evolution theory
Essay based on single, non-expert, source. Delete as Original research. This material is handled at population bottleneck Zeimusu | Talk page 15:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with Population bottleneck (needs someone familiar with the subject). JoJan 16:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research, and possibly copyvio - this shouldn't be merged, it's someone spouting off info they got from a TV program. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 16:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, for the same reasons. GhePeU 18:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete original research. Science fiction writer indeed. &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 19:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR Bad ideas 07:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with Population bottleneck This isn't original research; it's valid science, poorly written by WP standards. See this article for a look at our own species and near-extinction. --Surgeonsmate 23:23, 29 January 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.