Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Physical determinism

:{{la|Physical determinism}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Physical_determinism Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Physical determinism}})

This was created by then topic banned, now site banned editor User:Brews ohare in violation of his topic ban, as he worked his way towards earning his site ban.

In as much as there’s any content it’s a fork of Determinism which covers the physics of determinism well and in context: see Determinism#Modern scientific perspective. This adds nothing, just a collection of anecdotes culled from google searches, written by someone who understands little of the relevant physics or philosophy. No-one has taken it up since, no point userfying as the editor is blocked. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 18:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

:Delete I thought initially that there would be something worth saving there, but after reviewing both article, I have to agree this is an unnecessary/redundant WP:FORK of determinism. No objection on redirecting however, since this is a likely search term.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:45, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:14, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

:Delete per nomination ----Snowded ^TALK 22:48, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

• Redirect to Determinism#Varieties, where it is mentioned. While the current article doesn't have much worth salvaging, this is a real concept and it is reasonable to have redirect to a section that mentions it. --Mark viking (talk) 00:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.