Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaos cloud

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. Consensus is it isn't notable, and there isn't consensus on a redirect target. Star Mississippi 12:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos cloud

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Clearly non-notable — a bit of email spam that went around enough to get Snopes and one blog to write something about it, and was used as padding in a book “this year in astronomy” (see talk page). No lasting influence, no significant coverage, nothing to say about it beyond what Snopes did. JBL (talk) 12:25, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No need to go to the talk page to read what I said – here it is again. This hoax is covered in at least one book source [1] and Plait returned to the subject in 2014 [2] just before it was due to hit, thus showing that it had lasting notability for at least a decade. SpinningSpark 12:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, just got a brief bit of trivial coverage and anything after the fact is just regurgitating the same coverage again. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 16:15, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can suggest a viable redirect target, as there might barely be enough to merit a line somewhere (including the so-called "chaos cloud"). XOR'easter (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@XOR'easter: Phil Plait? SpinningSpark 09:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Plait has written about a whole lot of nonsense over the years; skeptical coverage of astronomical pseudoscience has been his thing since the '90s. This doesn't seem WP:DUE in his biography. XOR'easter (talk) 14:44, 24 April 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.