Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clairvoyance (book)
unless better sources can be found. Many of the sources in the article are about the concept of clairvoyance, with no connection to this book itself. My searching was ''suggestive'' that sources ''might'' exist, and we're supposed to keep articles if sources exist-but-haven't-been-included, however "might exist" isn't good enough. My searching suggests that if sources exist they are likely to be unreliable or otherwise problematical themselves. Without better sourcing any article here article is going to crash badly against |OR/|SYN or other policies. The current state of the article, and history versions, well illustrates the problem. The article is essentially unreadable and the sources and notes are a disaster
— User:Alsee, 16:59, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:SYN (Wikipedia:No original research)