Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biocentric universe (2nd nomination)
I was almost convinced by the Fringe arguments, so I read it. And while I was leaning to vote merge, the rules there changed my mind. The notability standard for Fringe, , includes the subsection “Notability versus Acceptance”, which very clearly states that being fringe is not a sufficient reason for deletion or merger. It cites general notability guidelines specifically as what should be applied, and as has been described above, the article very clearly meets . It states further that “a lack of peer-reviewed sources does not automatically mean that the subject should be excluded from Wikipedia,” which contradicts all arguments above claiming that peer-review is needed. Furthermore, I fear that a push to merge, especially if GNG is met, may be an effort to and in danger of violating . The Lanza page already mentions the theory, and so should there be a vote to merge or delete, no real changes would need to be made … so the merger argument seems highly redundant to me. It would not be needed to permit content on the idea on the Lanza page. Really, this is about keeping or deleting for me, black and white.Special:Contributions/2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879|2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879
— [[User talk:2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879|talk]])  — [[Special:Contributions/2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879|2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879]] ([[User talk:2605:8D80:6C0:775D:E830:4605:AB87:7879|talk]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic., 00:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NFRINGE||WP:GNG||WP:FRINGEBLP (Wikipedia:Fringe theories)