Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote influence

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. Sr13 07:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remote influence

Remote influence (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No sources. Presented as factual -- that is, as a technique that works, which is quite unlikely to be the case. This is at best another form of pesudoscience. No indication of notability even as a belief, unlike such topics as ESP. Includes significant promotional elements. DES ^(talk) 15:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per my nom. DES ^(talk) 15:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. I contacted the author telepathically and found he is not even remotely influenced by intelligent thought. He failed to seduce me. --Targeman 15:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • LOL! DES ^(talk) 16:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Crush by elephant. It's almost blatant advertising. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 17:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Remote delete. It was invented by a yahoo group in 1999, not a typical source of notable...anything. It seems to me all this page is here for is to spam a CD and a book. Someguy1221 02:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete There are plenty of academic journals that mention the term on the search engine, but they aren't related to psychic. Hence it's just not notable, especially other media like magazines and newspapers don't mention it.--Kylohk 08:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete per all of the above. I am now remotely asking a cloud to produce snow. Bearian 12:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• When it snows, ain't it thrilling, though your nose gets a chilling, we'll frolic and play, the Eskimo way, walking in a winter wonderland... --Targeman 13:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete it's advertising; It's an unnotable example of telepathy; The term has many other meanings as well, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Dan Gluck 20:03, 21 July 2007 (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.