Deletion of Weak dematerialization (Shroud of Turin)

Comment: per  and lack of reliable sources. At best, the main thrust of this article deserves a few lines in Shroud of Turin#Miraculous formation.  There's also the problem that most of the article is padded by "concurring hypotheses" which are in fact unrelated
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: Per talk page, looks like a |bad-faith nomination. I think ing takes place here to affirm the sole notion on Shroud, while there is no scientific consensus on image origin as showed in the Shroud of Turin.  I’ve provided some critical insight, but not a single scientific source, indicating WD’s flaws, has been provided by opponents .  The whole lynching-like action seems to be a shifting to some obscure view of the image origin, not currently tested. The article demonstrates that the theory '''has''' a following within the scientific community as per Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience#Alternative_theoretical_formulations|alternative theoretical formulations, passed in Arbcom’s pseudoscience request
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF||WP:POINT)

Comment: as an unintentionally hilarious |POV fork of the Shroud of Turin article. However, I will remember the wonderful phrase ''"the pion bonding holding the nucleons together was overcome by energy input into the body"'' with some fondness, since we all need more humor in our lives
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)