User talk:Ardegloo

Proposed deletion of Loop amplification


The article Loop amplification has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable neologism per WP:NEO; only reference mentioning it in the context of this psychological theory is one of the references given, and that reference is a self-published essay on an open access site with no indication of formal peer-review; no mention of this usage in any WP:Reliable sources online.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Scopecreep (talk) 05:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Loop amplification for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Loop amplification is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Loop amplification until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Scopecreep (talk) 08:30, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Continuum hypothesis
I have edited the CH article to remove the material about Faiq's writing about CH. Unless Faiq has published his views in some scientific venue, rather than simply publishing them on his website, they do not meet the standards that we require for articles about mathematical topics. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 20:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC)