Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philosophy of environment

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:13, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy of environment

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2006. Appears to be WP:OR or WP:SYNTH. Mccapra (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:TNT. There could well be call for a page on Philosophy of environment (or of environmentalism or similar) if discussed in suitable references, but this is not it. As per nom., this is unsourced, and OR. There is absolutely nothing here that could be kept in the event of creating a new article if anyone ever chose to do so, and this article may hinder any such efforts. WP:TNT pertains. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 11:45, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 16:42, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as word salad. (Further than the basic scientific theory of evolution (notably neo-darwinian, Evolutive Humanism, developed by Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould), looks at the necessity for Man of a permanent adaptation of both his organism and his thoughts to his universal environment. I mean, what?) We do have Environmental philosophy, a page that is in not entirely miserable shape, and this article could be made a redirect there, but there isn't any content in this article worth saving. XOR'easter (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree with prior comments. There might be a notable topic in there somewhere but I think unfortunately the way forward is WP:DYNAMITE. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 10:01, 5 February 2020 (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.