Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Religious Transhumanism


 * 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 Delete, after discounting invalid votes. Deathphoenix ʕ 13:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Religious Transhumanism
Vanity article written on the editor's own religous movement and/or doctrine, I'm not entirely sure if all of the article qualifies, though. See also: afd for Humanist Fellowship of North Texas - O bli (Talk) ? 14:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment. Very few (37 total, <10 unique) Google hits. Possible WP:NOR.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. While you might argue that my deleted article on Optihumanism was a vanity page, this one is definitely not. Obli is simply on a roll and clumping these into the same category.  For evidence that Religious Transhumanism is a significant movement, please see the reference listed at the end of the article.  User:David_Wallace_Croft (Actually entered by  19:56, 13 May 2006
 * Keep 24.174.7.230 13:12, 14 May 2006
 * Comment btw, there is another article titled Christian Transhumanism. --Gurubrahma 04:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.124.93.93 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 2 June 2006
 * Keep Religious Transhumanism is a significant movement that encompasses a number of distinct, futurist philosophies and viewpoints of what can be called a "religious" character, dealing with matters of ultimate significance in life. It has been in existence in some form for many years already, and is not simply a "vanity" creation of one person. As transhumanism itself develops we can expect further development in the religious sector, along with the need for further coverage. User:MikePerry 08:15, 4 June 2006
 * Keep Among the various futurist philosophies calling themselves transhumanist, the variant called Religious Transhumanism is a vaild one because it represents a distinct strain of thought, with more than a few adherents, that differs from the majority of secular transhumanists. Even within the category of Religious Transhumanism there are differnt schools, which only makes the category richer and therefore more worthy of being retained here. User:mike2050 20:47, 5 June 2006
 * Incomplete nomination listed now. - Liberatore(T) 14:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, despite some wonderful sockpuppetry.   Proto    ||    type    14:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Tevildo 15:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - A whole fourteen non-Wikipedia unique Google hits, plus the first source being a Yahoo group, argues for total non-notability. Vizjim 15:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per nom. -- Xyra  e  l  T 17:47, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Vanity article on nn movement. Fan1967 17:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn vanity religion. Sandstein 18:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability is still not a deletion criterion. Verifiable, so why not have an article on it? Grace Note 00:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What's verifiable? That a handful of people have a blog and a yahoo group? Fan1967 02:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete religioncruft. Danny Lilithborne 00:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I wonder why the signature dates are so scattered across time...? &mdash; RJH (talk) 15:32, 16 June 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.