Deletion of Cloned Dinosaurs and Their Ability to Survive on Earth in the 21st Century

Comment: As the nominator points out, this article openly claims to be a research paper, and Wikipedia is not a publisher of |original research. This bears little resemblance to an encyclopedia article, and is advancing an argument, rather than covering a notable topic in a neutral fashion. I made minor formatting changes to make it easier to evaluate the article, which has many other serious problems I won't bother to list or correct
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: The article as it stands is indisputably . The remaining question is whether the topic is itself notable, that is whether there are sources that discuss if dinosaurs could survive today and which would allow a non-OR article to be written. There are some popular science sourceshttp://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/what-if/what-if-dinosaurs-alive.htmhttp://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19971221&slug=2579248http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment/2007/09/even-if-we-could-bring-dinosaurs-back.html and forums/blogs/etchttp://www.dinosaurhome.com/would-dinosaurs-be-able-to-live-in-todays-environments-81922.htmlhttp://www.dinosaurhome.com/why-wold-dinosaurs-not-be-able-to-live-today-137092.htmlhttp://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_dinosaurs01.htmhttp://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?149694-Could-a-large-dinosaur-survive-todayhttp://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9953674/1/, but that's not enough. It would probably be better to discuss it in an article on hypothetical dinosaur cloning, which is a notable topic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)