Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casimir cones


 * 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   speedy delete. G3, vandalism Mgm|(talk) 10:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Casimir cones

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Probably a hoax. A Google search turns 0 (zero) results for  in the singular, showing the results of the search for   without quotes; these are pages which just happen to mention "Casimir" and "cone" in the same sentence. A search for  in the plural turns out only copies of this article and of Thought experiment. Using Google Scholar, I can't find any result for either the singular or the plural. Also, take a look at the author's user page. Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 17:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.   — Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 17:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Very strong delete. Given the original editor's user page I'm just shy of speedy deleting it as vandalism. Assuming good faith, the article is still unreferenced. —C.Fred (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It's a hoax. Dauto (talk) 18:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Probable hoax, with no supporting evidence, or even any meaningful content. Anaxial (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unlikely hoax, but almost certainly original research. JulesH (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It'd be "research" if it said the least bit of what the hell that thought-experiment should be based on. That one sentence is no "research" at all in my opinion, either original or not. -- Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 22:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. One sentence with no sources does not make an article. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Article seems to be a copy of a particular statement made here. Seems nonsense to me. Delete. JocK (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2009 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.