Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transcension Hypothesis
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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The result was Nomination withdrawn. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 01:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Transcension Hypothesis
- Transcension Hypothesis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD. I can't find any reliable sources on this subject that are independent of John M. Smart's paper, so I don't think that this hypothesis passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:51, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect. Transcension already gets a (generous, in my opinion) one-line mention at Fermi Paradox#They tend to experience a technological singularity. As far as I can tell, Smart's work hasn't gotten the third party attention needed for any further coverage here per WP:UNDUE. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, I didn't see that. I'll withdraw my nomination and redirect it there now. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 01:13, 10 April 2012 (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.