Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Voice to skull
An article being of poor quality or containing original research, by itself, is an improper reason for deletion.  is a reason to remove content, not remove an article; non-notability  would be a reason to remove an article. From : “If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD.” There are not a lot of reliable sources that discuss the term, but it looks like there are enough for at least a short article. While the topic attracts conspiracy theorists and pseudoscientific speculation, pseudoscience doesn't disqualify it from encyclopedic coverage; consider ghosts, bigfoot, unidentified flying object|UFOs, and even the fictional holodeck. Rules of  reliable sources still apply, and there are many self-published books, blogs, and other unreliable references to avoid, so I may be overestimating its coverage, but it seems like a plausibly notable topic, or perhaps synonym/subtopic of another article topic. If you based your decision on the content of the current article, I'd re-assess it based on an independent (i.e. not from the article) determination of notability or other legitimate grounds for article deletion
— User:Agyle, 17:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:N||WP:BEFORE||WP:RS (Wikipedia:No original research)