Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Indestructible Properties


 * 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 deleted at original creator's request, and also per WP:SNOW -- The Anome (talk) 13:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

The Indestructible Properties

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

As per User:Mercurywoodrose's comments in earlier PROD notice: this appears to be an original essay, with no references. no indication of notability, article appears to be tied to The Knowledge Which No One Can Have, which is also up for AfD: see Articles for deletion/The Knowledge Which No One Can Have -- The Anome (talk) 19:33, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete thanks for moving it here, i was extremely unsure where it fit, and i was also unsure of the exact way to have it listed here. im happy to see it discussed more fully here. however, im pretty confident that it has no chance of being kept, unless, as i said, someone can show that this is an accurate summary of a notable school of thought or philosopher.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 22:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:OR without any salvageable content. --Whoosit (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research. No direct connection to notable philosophy or philosophers. Ben Kidwell (talk) 23:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR with no useful content. Johnuniq (talk) 01:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I am the creator of this article. I have more interest in uncyclopedia than wikipedia. Delete at the earliest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginexplorer (talk • contribs) 03:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Uncyclopedia tagged your other article (similar to our WP:PROD). I'm not convinced this one meets UN:HTBFANJS either. Returning to Wikipedia, I agree with others that it's too much original research. Delete. • Anakin (talk) 11:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. After looking at Virginexplorer's comment, there are other contributors in the edit history, it doesn't qualify for G7 speedy deletion. That said, I have no objection to deleting it right now (WP:SNOW/WP:IAR). —C.Fred (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2009 (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.