Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proposed Fallacies within the momentum of causation


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 12:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Fallacies within the momentum of causation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

De'prod'ed, due to debate on talk page Original reason was Original Research, by Matticus78 RedHillian 14:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My vote? Delete as per nom. --RedHillian 14:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as nonsense. It reads like nonsense, even though it isn't. If not sd, then delete as WP:OR. If not OR, then delete in order to allow for a new, better, re-write - that article is a mess. Make it go away! Jobjörn  (Talk ° contribs) 14:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. Not quite patent nonsense, but it does seem to be original work by an amateur philosopher.  He seems to be asking us for help defining his terms; I'd point him first in the direction of the causality article. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per "what the hell?", nonsense. OR as well.--Tainter 15:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOR, unless reliable sources can be found. Walton monarchist89 18:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * According to the article, it is based upon a "Lectures in Logic series" by one Paul Priest. According to the talk page, this Priest is Onthesideoftheangels' erstwhile professor.  I can find no evidence that anyone named Paul Priest has published any books or articles entitled "Lectures in Logic". Uncle G 18:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Complete nonsense. Maniac 19:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks complete nonsense, and certainly completely unsourced so OR NBeale 22:50, 29 January 2007 (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.