Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conflicting theories

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. - Mailer Diablo 00:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Conflicting theories

For a start, this article is currently a mess, full of POV and factual errors, and would have to be completely rewritten no matter what. But more importantly, I don't think this is an encyclopedic topic and I'm not sure what could be said about it that isn't covered in articles such as scientific consensus, scientific method, falsifiability, or theories and sociology of the history of science. I don't think this article has a future, even in the best of all possible worlds. --Fastfission 02:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, pointless article. --YixilTesiphon 02:53, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Fastfission just stole the words off my keyboard :-) Vsmith 03:25, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Worthawholebean 04:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Issue is complicated by article's edit history... some previous work has been deleted. Anyway, this work is too good to just throw away. It's not great work, but its hella better than a lot that I've seen. I think the editrs bit off a bit more than she can chew -- it's a very complicated and fraught subject -- but I would not like to discourage her. Herostratus 07:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Again, I'm not sure this has anything that isn't found in other articles, and much of what it does have is either wrong or much more problematic than it currently is made out to be (i.e. the simplistic accounts of the Copernican revolution, Lysenkoism, and Michelson-Morley). --Fastfission 17:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete essay. No difference between "conflicting theories" and "different theories." Perhaps redirect to theory which discusses related matters. Gazpacho 09:36, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; seems like too vague a topic. Maybe some of this information can find a place in other articles relating to Theory. *Dan T.* 21:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Eusebeus 14:45, 8 December 2005 (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.