Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double dark theory

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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Double dark theory

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

Double dark theory appears to be a neologism by Joel Primack. While I think it's a clever one, I don't think it has been widely enough adopted to deserve a separate Wikipedia article. jps (talk) 02:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete if it's a real thing it might merit a mention at dark matter, but whether or not there's not enough for a separate article.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 03:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment as it seems to be his name for his dark matter theory I think redirecting it there makes sense, whether or not there's anything worth merging.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 03:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Zero sources, only a few cites in GS. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2013 (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.