Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Can Bohr's complementarity be tested?

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete -- Joolz 20:45, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Can Bohr's complementarity be tested?
Looks like pure orginal research, down to the complete lack of sources (other than the paper being critiqued), and being written in the first person Alai 20:07, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Obvious original research, and anything that isn't can be stuck into the Afshar experiment or Principle of Complementarity articles.  Note also that the userpage of the person who created the article actually redirects to this article, which seems to confirm that it's simply an original essay. Penelope D 20:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Afshar experiment or Principle of Complementarity  Dlyons493 20:48, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I corresponded at length with the author, on other topics. The author was trying to learn basic, college-level complex analysis, and had no understanding of quantum mechanics beyond what is stated in the pop-sci literature. This is truly pure, unadulaterated speculation. (FWIW, person was an M.D. and/or researcher in neurobiology). linas 21:42, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research, and it seems to duplicate other articles Salsb 18:21, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as patent vanity page on the author's cranky "research". Among the inaccuracies are implications that the author is a Harvard physicist, but Linas sez author dunno complex analysis!  I mean, really!  I have been spending some time today with VfD as an exercise in good wikicitizenship, and am beginning to notice some voting patterns.  Dlyons493, I notice you tend to vote to keep things like this, but your reasons are too brief to make any sense to me.  Can you elaborate on one of these pages why you would want to keep cranky pages like these around?---CH  (talk) 23:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.