Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Failed Bible prophecies
but I reject the view that this is |original research, see the section in Criticism of the Bible on Criticism of the Bible#Prophecies|prophecies. Nor is this article |sythesis, the author didn't reach these conclusions himself/herself, there is plenty of evidence that they have been reached, rightly or wrongly, by others. The article is certainly |not neutral especially in its choice of title.  The problem is that this list fails tand-alone lists (See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section.) in that it lacks adequate selection criteria, lacks reference to sources that would establish criteria, lacks necessary background information and references to sources for that background information, and thus fails to provide encyclopedic context, producing an indiscriminate list that therefore breaches the ''policy'' at . Were this topic not already adeqautely covered in Wikipedia, I might suggest that by renaming and adding adequate criteria, background information and sources for both, as well as proper sourcing in the text, the article might be salvaged; or given the scope of the infirmaties I might suggest ; but '''delete''' is proper because it is also needlessly duplicative. (See ontent forking.)  No redirect is recommended because of the |non-neutrality of the title
— User:Bejnar, 17:35, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:OR||WP:NPOV||WP:S||WP:NOT||WP:TNT||WP:C||WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:No original research)