![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 February 14. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. JForget 00:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC) reply
The premise of the article is flawed; psychology is an actual science, whereas the rest is just contestable mysticism. Mixing the two in one article makes very little sense. The sourced material should be moved to different or new articles where appropriate, and the new-age content should be separated from the content about psychological research or forgotten about entirely where it isn't documenting a directly attributable belief (with sources). Snied ( talk) 16:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 February 14. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. JForget 00:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC) reply
The premise of the article is flawed; psychology is an actual science, whereas the rest is just contestable mysticism. Mixing the two in one article makes very little sense. The sourced material should be moved to different or new articles where appropriate, and the new-age content should be separated from the content about psychological research or forgotten about entirely where it isn't documenting a directly attributable belief (with sources). Snied ( talk) 16:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC) reply