Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pentadimensional Theory

Pentadimensional Theory
Doesn't look encyclodpedial to me. -- Khym Chanur 08:38, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Plus it's cobblers. Delete with extreme prejudice. --Phil | Talk 10:52, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * It's pseudo-scientific rot. Unfortunately, lots of people believe in pseudoscientific rot, so if enough people believe in this particular bit of pseudoscientific rot, we should keep it on the condition we explain why it is pseudoscientific rot. Average Earthman 12:35, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - sounds like something I read once in a Dungeons and Dragons manual... - Texture 15:23, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, on the grounds that it is a theory which is pretty well on the same level as some religions we have articles about. As long as we say that it cannot possibly ever be proven, there is no real reason to delete it - this is an encyclopædia, not a gosphel.  Falcon 17:07, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Move to Clean-up (with a specific request to know who believes this). Rossami 17:45, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Now a reasonable article about this crap.  moink 22:41, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * How do you know it's reasonable? What are your other sources of information on Pentadimensional Theory? --Zundark 11:37, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-noteworthy pseudoscience. Josh Cherry 02:22, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Everyking 02:45, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Does this theory exist anywhere else? I couldn't find any apparent references to it elsewhere but it's difficult to be sure with such a vague concept. MK 04:45, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: nonnotable, pseudoscience. Only Google hits are at the Fourier Institute & definitely not pseudoscience. Given that the Internet is the greatest cruft magnet in the history of the universe, PT would turn up on Google if it turned up anywhere, I figure. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:00, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps any page it may be on is not registered on google? Or maybe it is not posted on the internet for some reason except here?  Simply because something does not have an internet page does not mean that it is completely unheard of.  Falcon 01:15, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * You appear to be the person providing this information. Can you offer any cites to corroborate that this theory exists outside of what you've posted? MK 05:40, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete; nothing from Google supports its existence. -Sean 05:10, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I've changed my vote to Keep, since it's been cleaned up. -- Khym Chanur 06:39, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: pseudoscience -- Forseti 10:58, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears to be a complete fabrication. --Zundark 11:37, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone can come up with some references - may be valid if it is actually a reference to a new age belief system or something. -Seth Mahoney 18:25, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Utter nonsense. A theory espoused by pyramid wearers. I regret that A. Earthman used up the entire daily quota of 'pseudoscientific rot', because I'd have liked to have been able to apply a few here myself. Denni 19:47, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nonsense and not even a coherent belief system; total fabrication.  Would be an orphan save for a link from Vampire lifestyle.  +sj+ 15:59, 2004 Mar 26 (UTC)
 * Actually, for those interested, I came upon it around the same time I found out all the stuff about vampire cultists. Some of them seem to worship it as some manner of faith... Falcon 06:07, Mar 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Who, exactly, are these people that subscribe to the Pentadimensional Theory? Unless there actually exist such people, there's no need for an article. Where is this theory described? The correctness of the article can't be judged if nobody knows what the PT is. Wile E. Heresiarch 01:07, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems cleaned-up enough to well represent anyone who will want to believe in it. --d8uv (t)  21:21, 2004 Mar 27 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless someone provides evidence that this theory exists. Andris 01:21, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence that this exists. Maximus Rex 04:46, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)