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.
Delete per nom. An article that treats the topic as at a meta-level might be acceptable (e.g. an article about the belief as in Superstition), but as written it appears the article is factually wrong. Mdmkolbe 17:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While pseudoscience in-and-of-itself is not grounds for deletion, when the pseudoscience has no chance of being reliably sourced, it needs to be excised from Wikipedia. ScienceApologist (talk) 14:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.