Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unicogse

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. Johnleemk | Talk 11:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unicogse

Unverifiable, non-notable, spam, original research, and/or vanity. This is part of a series of articles linked ultimately to Tao Yang created in an attempt to promote his "computational verb theory" and related concepts.

Regarding lack of verifiability and original research: I challenge anyone out there to find verifiable, independent, peer-reviewed sources that seriously discuss "computational verb theory". By "independent" I mean sources that are neither (a) Wikipedia mirrors; (b) web sites published by Mr. Yang; (c) books self-published by Mr. Yang; (d) journals edited by Mr. Yang; nor anything else related directly or indirectly to Mr. Yang and/or colleagues. Keep in mind that the references cited in these articles do not meet these criteria; for example, Mr. Yang is the editor (and apparently also the publisher) of the International Journal of Computational Cognition.

Regarding vanity and lack of notability: Even if the topic of "computational verb theory" is found to be verifiable, I'll also claim that it is not sufficiently notable to warrant several articles. The present state of affairs inflates the significance of Mr. Yang's theories beyond their apparent merit.

Related nominations:

This list may be incomplete. Please expand as appropriate.

Nominate and endorse deletion. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Yang's Scientific Research Institute, reasoning provided under that article nomination. Durova 01:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)a[reply]
Strong Delete All. This is timecube-level crankery: "Human brains open windows from the side of the Universe towards the Cognition by using natural languages." This is the kind of stuff that wastes the time of many an academic department. Ai yi yi. rodii 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Timecube? I think it's more like Harmonics Theory. —Ruud 01:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pure weapons-grade balonium. Violation of original research at best; wikispam at worse. --DV8 2XL 03:29, 16 January 2006 (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.