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, see WP:SYN. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remote Neural Monitoring

[edit]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. —Amit (talk) 15:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computers-related deletion discussions. —Amit (talk) 15:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. —Amit (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. —Amit (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The stated sources do not support the claims of RNM. RNM is a fantasy of people who do not understand the technology needed to make it possible. I might be okay with a rewrite of the article, describing RNM as a fear of some people, but even then it might not be sufficiently notable. In its current state, the article serves to support the fantastic claims of those who believe in it. Amit (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The sources do not support the existence of the technology described in the article. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete - The information is correct. More sources could be provided and the public is right to ackowledge the existence of technologies that are declassified and can be purchased by the public. If not ackowledged by the public that anyone can purchase the hardware to create these electromagnetic enviroments, the government would be blamed when they actually may not be using the technology on a person. The public need be aware of criminals misusing technology and report it to an authority on electromagnetic weapons.

http://www.surveillanceissues.com/

http://www.democraticfundamentalism.org/2005/psychotronics/technology/technology.htm

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.250.200.113 (talk) 16:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the article's citations support the claims that (a) EEGs can read brain activity from the scalp, and (b) that some people are afraid of remote monitoring. These ideas are adequately covered by the articles on EEG and Conspiracy theory; any other claims violate WP:OR and WP:RS Bm gub (talk) 21:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Just keep your tinfoil hat on. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2008 (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.