Deletion of Predictive programming

Comment: While it could be argued there should be more coverage of 'notable' conspiracy theories on Wikipedia (in their own articles, where they can be shown with the facts that prove they're preposterous), as none of the sites are ever going to be anywhere near , but as policy stands now, it cannot meet , and I see no reason to start with this one. This article would need a complete rewrite in order to be presented in an encyclopedic and factual way.  &#8213;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: I suspect that the subject is probably notable, but the cited sources are fringe and massively fail . A Google yielded a ton of hits but the first ten pages were pretty much all fringe and the few that weren't would still not have met our standards. As it stands it is little more than a PROFRINGE essay. The article currently fails , , and . Even if RS sources are found, my advice would be to blank the article and start from scratch. Yes, it really is that bad
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:V||WP:PROFRINGE||WP:UNDUE)