Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/September 23, 2017 star sign prophecy


 * 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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 21:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

September 23, 2017 star sign prophecy

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

What if they had an apocalypse and nobody came? That seems to be the issue here: I can't read the Boston Globe article, but it seems to be dismissive, judging from the headline. Everything else seems to be a mixture of references to buttress uncontroversial statements and in-world fringe publications. Unlike some of these end-of-the-world prophecies it looks as though this one never caught the attention of the outside world. So I'm seeing notability issues on top of the too-much-fringe-detail issues. Mangoe (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:29, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. It did receive some attention from the outside world - see the Washington Post article. There are a lot of unreliable sources here that should be removed, but AfD is not cleanup. StAnselm (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astrology-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 00:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Hardly notable, and WP:TNT applies. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete if this was a notable topic, we would see some sustained coverage, but this is just a flash in the pan, Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. Hemiauchenia (talk) 15:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of WP:SUSTAINED coverage in RS. No reason why this rises above the general background noise of Christian Apocalypse predictions unlike, say, Harold Camping's failed predictions which received widespread and longer-term coverage. Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 16:54, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. If the coverage in the Washington Post and Boston Globe references is sufficient for an entry in the List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events, it can get a row there between John Hagee/Mark Biltz and David Meade (author). –LaundryPizza<b style="color:#b00">03</b> ( d c̄ ) 01:59, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete -- One in a long line of failed predictions of the End, based on some person's theory as to how scripture should be interpreted. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.