Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extraterrestrism

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 speedy delete. CSD G7. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extraterrestrism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

A Google search at this moment shows one hit for the word "extraterrestrism" on the entire Internet, which is a weblog in Spanish that defines the term (when translated) as "in reality there are two species of aliens responsible for artificially creating two other [species of aliens]", which has nothing to do with the content of this Wikipedia article. There's nothing in Google Books or Google Scholar. The citations provided for the article don't show any sign that this is a real thing (at least not in the sense that there is a religion called Extraterrestrism - UFO religions in general do exist, which is what the link YouTube link shows, but the citations don't show those UFO religions existing under this name or in the format postulated in the article). Note that one of the five citations in this article shows that UFO religions exist in general, and the other four of the five citations show not that Extraterrestrism exists, but show only that some religions have a concept of multiple worlds - although even these citations look pretty bad, since they are from publishers like Notion Press - which is a self-publishing company, and the book from Notion was written by someone who appears to have a tenuous connection to reality. As it is, this appears to be a neologism for "UFO Religion", and even a redirect to UFO Religion would be incorrect, as the word doesn't really exist. --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 00:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UFO religions 100% exists. They are religions which acknowledge extraterrestrial existence. The reason for the term not being used on the internet is because Extraterrestrism is a new religion and religious movement . RileyXeon (talk) 00:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I acknowledge in my AfD, above, that UFO religions exist ("UFO religions in general do exist"). However, "Extraterrestrism" is what I'm saying doesn't exist. --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 00:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extraterrestrism does exist because I am the founder of it RileyXeon (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at WP:COI (especially WP:COISELF) and WP:NOT (especially WP:FORUM). --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 02:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI is a concern, simply because you can't write about something you yourself are involved with. Oaktree b (talk) 02:56, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I thought you said "UFO religions in general doesn't exist" RileyXeon (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't reach Wikipedia expectations then I am fine with it being removed RileyXeon (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Paranormal and Religion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Sources used aren't even about the subject of the article; it appears to be strung together using small bits of references to other subjects to draw conclusions that aren't there. COI is a big concern, and I don't see notability otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 02:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete as nominator. This is something non-notable that was made up by the creator of the article, and that creator has said that it's all right to delete it if it doesn't meet WP's standards.. --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 03:00, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You guys can remove it now if you want RileyXeon (talk) 06:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry if i've coursed a mess RileyXeon (talk) 06:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You haven't done anything terrible. Just make sure to read over the policies that the other users linked to, and maybe the core content policies as well. Wikipedia is for topics that have already achieved notability in the news or in professional academic research. If you're interested in putting some time into learning how to use Wikipedia, you can go to Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user to find a user that can help. You can also go to the Wikipedia:Teahouse if you have any questions about editing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• speedy delete – I'll second that. This article is little short of a hoax. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:57, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable and unverified. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:54, 4 September 2022 (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.