Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy Loop Theory


 * 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   delete. No prejustice against recreation if this becomes notable. The Bushranger One ping only 07:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Energy Loop Theory

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I was very tempted to speedy this as a hoax, but at the very least it's original research backed only by a reference to the author's personal website, and as such it fails to meet the standards for inclusion. Contested PROD. Favonian (talk) 08:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable: lacking significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. And this is one of the very rare cases where the material does indeed seem to be original research. Speedy would not have been appropriate. Thincat (talk) 09:48, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete A grand total of five Yahoo hits. Blueboy96 12:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  — &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 12:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: a theory of everything created through reductionism of the building blocks of life to the energy level. If confirmed, it effectively solves every method of quantum theory including wave-particle duality, quantum superposition, quantum entanglement, quantum decoherence and more importantly allows us to measure and observe super-sub-atomic particles. The proposed method would also allow for manipulation of our environment at the subatomic level without breaking or even observing energy bonds. Sounds like a fringe theory to me, and judging from lack of Books, News, and Scholar bits, not a notable fringe theory. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I did write this article on this theory to include it as a source of information. IT IS NOT MY THEORY. It is also... a "THEORY" so I'm not so sure why you expect their to be multiple sources as though it's fact. It could take decades for the community to understand the concept but by deleting it you are censoring knowledge. Feel free to edit the page to conform with Wikipedia layout but there are not yet many sources for reference for obvious reasons. Wikipedia is supposed to be a way to share this kind of information, not delete it because it's not already known worldwide. Use your brain people. --Oninementor (moved down here by &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2011 (UTC))
 * I have made some remarks at User talk:Oninementor. Thincat (talk) 18:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as OR. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:45, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as its not really sense Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 00:38, 20 September 2011 (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.