Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Břetislav Kafka

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Břetislav Kafka

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable Czech parapsychologist, the problem is that no reliable references can be found. Article is original research and the few sources that are on it are all unreliable fringe sources (Michael Talbot) etc. Goblin Face (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Goblin Face (talk) 15:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 23. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 16:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No reliable sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete If the only sources are other fringe sources we won't be able to create a balanced article up to Wikipedia's standards as per WP:FRINGE Simonm223 (talk) 17:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fringe researchers need mainstream sources (covering their work in-depth from the mainstream point of view) to put their work in perspective, per WP:NPOV and WP:FRINGE. We don't have such sources in this case. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, lack of reliable non-fringe sources. --Randykitty (talk) 11:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.