Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Chlois Theory

I agree that the article should be edited. To be fair, the article should also include all evidence presented by the theory's detractors, as well. However, the theory has enough adequate support to merit its own article. The fact that some disagree with the theory should not mean it is invalid as a hypothesis. Otherwise, we'd have to delete every article on why people believe in the Loch Ness Monster, Big Foot, The Anastasia theory, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.119.63.137 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 2 September 2006.
 * Those theories are notable outside of a small subset of people, and are apart of Western culture. Chlois Theory is not, and the creator of the show has publicly discounted it. Furthermore, Chlois Theory is speculative by nature, and according to WP:NOT, "Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and 'future history' are original research and therefore inappropriate." All three theories you listed are not speculative, as they make no predictions about what will happen in the future and they don't exist to prop up support of the theories. The comparisons aren't apt. - Debuskjt 16:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * And just for the record, as a fan of the show I want the Chlois Theory to be real, but that doesn't mean I can't realize it isn't appropriate content for a Wikipedia article per its guidelines/policies on WP:NOTABLE, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:NOT. - Debuskjt 16:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)