Deletion of List of topics characterized as pseudoscience (3rd nomination)

Comment: Inherently violates .  For example, Ernest Rutherford|Rutherford said ,"''All science is either physics or stamp-collecting''".  Does this mean that stamp-collecting is a pseudoscience?  Or that everything but physics is a pseudoscience?  Or that we are in the realm of insults and jokes?  |Wikipedia is not for opinion, advocacy and attacks
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:NOTOPINION)

Comment: For an editor who has expressed that they "don't know what this page was originally," the nominator has certainly been involved in its disputes, and has now started this '''without announcing it on the talk page!''' That's a serious procedural fault. I just discovered this by chance. Editorial disputes should not be solved by AfDs. Several other editors have made |POINTY attempts to sabotage the list by threatening AfDs and by listing absurdities, all in their attempts to ultimately protect their favorite pseudoscience from mention, even though notable V & RS have declared their pet ideas to be pseudoscientific. This list allows Wikipedia to do its mission, which is to use V & RS to document the real world. Why should promoters of pseudoscience be allowed to sabotage the list? The POINT violations need to stop and certain editors be topic banned from the subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: if anything at all - to "List of pseudosciences" and have the inclusion criteria mirror ; whereas, the resulting list article will have entries mirroring that of tl|Category:Pseudoscience but with an explanation next to each entry (as we have it now). Otherwise, I'd vote '''Keep''' and remind everyone that being included in this list does not mean that a topic is definitively pseudoscientific; ''only that some notable source has characterized it as such.'' Essentially, either this is a "List is of topics characterized as pseudoscience" and we abide by  by including all notable characterizations past and present ''or'' we change it to a "List of pseudosciences" and we only include obvious pseudosciences or topics which are generally considered pseudosciences
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:PSCI||WP:NPOV)