Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Smith (remote viewer)

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted - SimonP 14:40, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Paul Smith (remote viewer)

Some hits on Google, many not the same person. Article is in a big mess and I was going to just tag for clean-up, but chat room suggesting VfD, so I thought i'd add it here. I'm not sure whether a Texas remote viewer is notable or not, theres a comment on the talk page suggesting he isn't. I don't think hes too notable but as i'm not sure i'll go with a weak delete, clean-up if it survives. Hedley 02:26, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• From talk page: Boy, what do we do with articles about people's imaginary lives? Does this guy exist, I wonder? - DavidWBrooks 20:49, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC) Hedley 02:28, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. He seems to be a bigshot in the remote viewing community, but that doesn't make for sufficient notability. --Carnildo 04:10, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Nonsense. Gamaliel 05:23, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep bigshots in the remote viewing community. Kappa 12:09, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but needs a severe NPOVing - David Gerard 17:29, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, notability not established (and I find the article highly dubious). Radiant_* 19:00, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn. vlad_mv 03:15, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Is there any evidence that this person actually exists and is an important person in the "remote viewing community"? Is there any proof that this is anything other than a hoax or self-promotion? Gamaliel 06:25, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Most of these guys are bigshots for no reason other than sufficient self-promotion. --Carnildo 07:10, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • That would mean this article is likely a kind of vanity, no? Radiant_* 12:22, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete likely promotion. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:42, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable CDC (talk) 19:40, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• keep Paul Smith bio. I agree the Wiki stubb is very badly written, but I find the claims above that Paul Smith does not exist to be absolutely laughable. He is one of the 3/4 men responsible for the development of remote viewing as a structured process. No question. In fact, he wrote the military manual on the subject! Now his existence, and the significance of his work is clear. The only real question is whether Wiki wants remote viewing in it. Based upon my past experiences on deletion, Wiki has a pro Western materialistic skeptical bias to its voting, and it will get dumped for this reason. But personally, I don't understand the logic of voting in WWE referees, and dumping guys like Paul...... but thats exactly how Wiki works. Timharwoodx 16:13, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• User's first day.

• Delete. Nonsense vanity! --Neigel von Teighen 18:36, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.