Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zdeněk Rejdák


 * 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.  → Call me  Hahc  21  03:06, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Zdeněk Rejdák

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The same user created the Břetislav Kafka article which was recently deleted. The main problem is that there are no reliable references for these parapsychologists. They are not notable parapsychologists which have been discussed in mainstream sources. The only references used on the article are a minority of fringe and self-published sources. As no reliable sources can be found I believe this should be deleted like the other. Goblin Face (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Support Deletion. Self-published articles should be destroyed. This article is no exception. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Goblin Face (talk) 23:37, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Self-published? You are taking the paranormal too seriously. He died in 2004. However sources are inadequate. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:36, 10 March 2014 (UTC).
 * Tentative keep -- I think the article fits well within wikipedia parameters if the sources can be improved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bali88 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete, per Xxanthippe and per nom. The sources in the article are either to publications by Rejdak himself, and so are not independent, or to fringe sources that do not pass WP:RS. Does not pass WP:RS and does not pass any of the relevant notability guidelines, such as WP:BIO and WP:PROF, especially given the WP:FRINGE topic of the article. Nsk92 (talk) 02:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with Xxanthippe, sources are a deal-breaker here. Agricola44 (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2014 (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.