Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reevolution

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.  (aeropagitica)  20:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reevolution

Delete nonsensical neologism—"the theory of when something evolves ,but more than it has to, so it can fight the problem rather than just adapting to survive with it." It looks like someone simply got confused by natural selection. The article was prodded and tagged for verification; the author removed both tags and only responded by adding the link to a subscription only source as "backing up" the "theory." As a sign of how carelessly this posting was made, the link was described as "J. P. Grime's book American Naturalist"; American Naturalist is actually a journal to which Grimes had contributed an article. Postdlf 22:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Nonsense. Slowmover 22:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Pseudoscientific. Bobby1011 00:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete: patent nonsense Alba 00:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete. Poorly written, nonsensical, and it offers us no reason why we shouldn't assume that this is original research. Aplomado - UTC 01:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as the original 'prod'er. It's pretty much complete bollocks. Hynca-Hooley 21:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete obvious nonsense. --metzerly 17:09, 16 March 2006 (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.