Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monarch programming

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 redirect to Cathy O'Brien. —SW— ^soliloquize 15:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Monarch programming

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

WP:Original research; referenced only with external links to blogs making unverifiable claims of a sub-program of Project MKULTRA and Project ARTICHOKE. Can't find any coverage online of the subject from WP:Reliable sources. See also Cathy O'Brien#Project Monarch: currently Monarch Project and Project Monarch redirect there. Proposed deletion was contested by article's creator. Scopecreep (talk) 11:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Scopecreep (talk) 11:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. Scopecreep (talk) 11:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. Scopecreep (talk) 11:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

---

Redirect: Redirecting to Cathy O'Brien would be more useful than deleting. K2709 (talk) 12:31, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - As I understand it, the article's not specifically about Project Monarch, but the mind-control technique from which the Project took its name. Whether or not this has any place in an encyclopaedia is another matter, but I don't think redirecting to either Cathy O'Brien or Project MKULTRA would be appropriate. Perhaps some info on Project Monarch could be added to Project MKULTRA, though, if reliable sources turn up (which doesn't look likely). Anyway, I don't know how this sort of thing is normally handled, so I'll hold off from !voting for now. DoctorKubla (talk) 13:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it's the project to develop the mind control technique or the technique itself seems largely irrelevant to me; both are essentially fictions with no discussions in any real sources - just blogs, online fora and other unreliable sources. As far as I am aware Project Monarch isn't believed to actually exist, at least not by anyone with a shred of credibility, and thus inclusion in Project MKULTRA is inappropriate. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 15:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, purge and rinse, and wipe the minds of all users who may have seen this. This forbidden knowledge must not be revealed to the unIlluminated masses. --Lambiam 13:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: Redirect to Cathy O'Brien. Subject doesn't have the level of notability to support a standalone article. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect : Unintelligible gobbledygook, notable only in regard to Cathy O'Brien's delusions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect; in fact, any objections my snowball close and a bold redirection? [1] WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 14:52, 30 March 2012 (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.