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. Fails WP:BIO. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 12:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George P. Hansen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

H/T to User:Dan skeptic for pointing this one out. Having read the sources available, it seems that this particular parapsychologist is not particularly notable (appears to fail WP:BIO). jps (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - only self published sources. The only other source I found is [1] but Fortean Times isn't the most reliable source when we have a clearly WP:FRINGE topic. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Not notable. Only coverage is on conspiracy theory and paranormal blogspots promoting his stuff and some YouTube videos. Absolutely no reliable references. Dan skeptic (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:AUTHOR #3 multiple book reviews listed here. I have not verified all of these but see no reason they would be wrong, three example verifications in Journal of Religion & Psychical Research;Oct2003, Vol. 26 Issue 4, p236, Fortean Times (Issue No. 175, 2003, pp. 40-410) and Journal of Parapsychology;Jun2002, Vol. 66 Issue 2, p197. The status of Parapsychology as an unambiguously WP:FRINGE topic seems to be controversial on reading the Parapsychology article so it would be controversial for us to unambiguously assert fringe status in this AfD. We have many Category:Parapsychologists articles. At least two of the sources work regardless of FRINGE classification, Skeptical Inquirer and Fortean Times. And the book itself takes a critical view towards its own field, discussion here. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I disagree. There's hardly any reviews and look at where the few are, they are in pseudoscience and fringe parapsychology journals that are not even accessible online. Journal of paraspsychology is not a reliable reference, and it was written by Michael Grosso a well known paranormal believer. There are no reliable references for Hansen's book and it has not been reviewed in the Skeptical Inquirer. You also say "the book itself takes a critical view towards its own field" (no evidence for this) and you link to an anti-skeptic website owned by Rupert Sheldrake and other woo-believers which claims stuff like psychokinesis and reincarnation has been proven. Sorry but not reliable references. Dan skeptic (talk) 21:33, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Absence of reliable sources. WP:BIO not established, IRWolfie- (talk) 22:13, 29 October 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.