Talk:Strong gravity

Text and/or other creative content from Strong gravitational constant was copied or moved into Strong gravity with this edit on 16:42, 12 April 2011. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Strong gravity[edit]

This article is a renamed version of Strong gravitational constant; see Talk:Strong_gravitational_constant for some background. Please note that this topic was discussed at ANI due to WP:COI and WP:OR edits; see discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Speculative_physics_theories_being_promoted_in_Wikipedia_and_Wikiversity and Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User_fedosin_and_physicist_Sergey_Fedosin.

The text of the article Strong gravity was taken from the article and is creation of Bm gub. At the moment he deleted the article Strong gravitational constant by redirecting from it to Strong gravity. Also he offer to make subsection here for adding of text which is in the page Strong gravitational constant. In my opinion his idea about the subsection is wrong. For example there is no any subsection about gravitational constant in article gravitation.

Firstly I prepared the material about Strong gravitational constant only for the article about Strong gravitational constant, not for the article strong gravity. I never will add this my material in subsection of the article since I do not agree with the offer of Bm gub. Fedosin (talk) 08:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very big improvement on the previous state of Strong gravitational constant[edit]

Wikipedia's policy on "original research' means that we do not publish anybody's specialized research papers or results as if they were encyclopedia articles: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully ... A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source." Obviously, this completely rules out an "article" that is densely crammed with equations referenced to somebody's physics research paper. betsythedevine (talk) 00:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure. The article Strong gravitational constant is really about Strong gravitational constant.

Fedosin (talk) 08:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong gravitational constant: Redirect or delete? I suggest a second AfD[edit]

Although I support this much-improved article and the redirect to Strong gravity from the article title Strong gravitational constant, I think an actual deletion discussion is a clearer way to tidy the history and establish consensus. I have already asked the closer of the first AfD, and he agrees.

Some relevant links:

The process is explained [[1]], but basically one needs to undo the redirect, add {{subst:afdx|2nd}} at the top of the page, and do a bit more to notify people appropriately. I will start the ball rolling in a few hours unless others have a better way to proceed. betsythedevine (talk) 12:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have now filed the AfD and will be notifying people who have posted to this talk page and to the talk page of the previous article. betsythedevine (talk) 15:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]