The result was no consensus. No consensus to delete though a big clean-up would be welcomed here. JForget 18:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No references, reads like WP:OR, uses lots "if we assume, then...". AKA reads like OR, smells like OR and probably is OR. Subject itself is notable (as evidenced by a google search), but I have a hard time connecting what's in the article with what I find on google. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC) reply
*Keep, non-speedyable articles about notable subjects are only deleted when their condition is so abysmal that it would be more efficient to delete them and rewrite completely. To bring an article about a notable subject in
quantum physics concerning which an acceptable article could be written to AFD on the grounds of original research is inappropriate, since the determination of whether the article should be deleted requires considerable expertise which most editors participating in the discussion will lack. (By contrast, if a quantum physics article were nominated for deletion on the basis of a claim that its topic constituted original research, the matter could easily be resolved by reference to whether
WP:RS for the subject matter existed.)
Andrea105 (
talk)
00:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus. No consensus to delete though a big clean-up would be welcomed here. JForget 18:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No references, reads like WP:OR, uses lots "if we assume, then...". AKA reads like OR, smells like OR and probably is OR. Subject itself is notable (as evidenced by a google search), but I have a hard time connecting what's in the article with what I find on google. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC) reply
*Keep, non-speedyable articles about notable subjects are only deleted when their condition is so abysmal that it would be more efficient to delete them and rewrite completely. To bring an article about a notable subject in
quantum physics concerning which an acceptable article could be written to AFD on the grounds of original research is inappropriate, since the determination of whether the article should be deleted requires considerable expertise which most editors participating in the discussion will lack. (By contrast, if a quantum physics article were nominated for deletion on the basis of a claim that its topic constituted original research, the matter could easily be resolved by reference to whether
WP:RS for the subject matter existed.)
Andrea105 (
talk)
00:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
reply