Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organon Sixth Edition

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD✉ 23:24, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Organon Sixth Edition
Such an obscure text which seems to have been copied and pasted. Utterly unreadable. Agreed by several wikipedians at Talk:Homeopathy PhatRita 17:00, 27 July 2005 (UTC)


 * deleteI suspect it is a copyvio.Geni 17:08, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above reasoning. It appears to be copied from elsewhere, yet I can't make heads or tails of what it is trying to say. Edwardian 17:49, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete little more than nonsense. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 18:05, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite -- badly POV, but can be salvaged if converted into a brief article about the origins and history of the book. While homeopathy is quackery, it's very, very notable, and this is far from homeocruft. Haikupoet 02:43, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite - badly written but I remember the content from a course I took last year while in a naturopathy degree program. The concept is 'badly' explained, it looks more like someone's notes with some text attached.  I noted there is a couple of loose references in the article, --203.12.172.254 07:17, 28 July 2005 (UTC)Berniebear
 * Comment. I believe 203.12.172.254 was the original "author" of the article. Anyone want to verify this? Edwardian 07:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Anything salvageable can be covered at Homeopathy. Fire Star 18:02, 29 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.