Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premodernist paradigm


 * 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 speedy delete as repost. Kimchi.sg 16:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Premodernist paradigm
Might be original research; more likely comes from the Postmodernism Generator, available at http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo. --OliverTraldi 00:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC) Delete Pure non-knowledge. -- Librarianofages 02:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, I don't think this is a hoax from the Generator, but it's definitely original research. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. -- H·G (words/works) 01:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all of the above, and zero incoming links. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib Reverts 02:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 04:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article needs cleanup and conformity to MoS yet its got citations and there are no real reasons why this should be deleted. SynergeticMaggot 06:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. I'd wager hoax via Dada generator. Author who created this article did so anonymously, created this one article in toto, then decamped. I tried Googling a quotes: ""Class is part of the stasis of narrativity," attrib Foucault, Baudrillard, Gilberte. I searched for other phrases, and started getting all kinds of essays all written in the same style & format & with the same vocab, as well as frequent Dada generator hits. --SigPig 08:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Hoax and patent nonsense.  I've played with the PoMo generator myself: the generation of "references" where most are published by Loompanics or And/Or Press is diagnostic.  Smerdis of Tlön 14:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I smell a pseudo-intellectual hoax here myself. As written, the article is nonsense. Unless a very strong cleanup can be done to prove there's an actual subject in here, this deserves a delete per WP:HOAX. Scorpiondollprincess 14:58, 17 July 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.