Deletion of Blood electrification (2nd nomination)

Comment: The article is cleansing me in it's |warm soapy goodness.  If not delete, recommend a prune back to historical, notable and verifiable context.  At the moment it reads rather like it's preaching to the masses about it's effectiveness.  And that's one thing you cannot clean yourself |with
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAPBOX||WP:SPAM)

Comment: Further scrutiny of  leads me to now conclude that the existence of an article on this subject may be appropriate.  However, the article in its current form needs serious '''Cleanup'''.  That's acceptable because it appears to be a surmountable problem and AFD is not cleanup.  I say ''weak'' keep because according to , "In order to be notable, a fringe theory should be referenced ''extensively'', and in a serious manner, in at least one major publication or by a notable group or individual." and this is an extremely subjective and debatable criteria
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: without prejudice for recreation as MastCell described. As far as I can tell, this article is functioning as a |soapbox
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: Sources do not demonstrate |notability (per ), and are manifestly unfit to create a neutral encyclopedia article. This article could potentially be rebuilt from the ground up (using actual independent, reliable secondary sources such as http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/medicaldevices/ this), but there's nothing salvageable here - just an ad for Robert Beck
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:FRINGE)