Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ferroelectric Glassy Water


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Ferroelectric Glassy Water

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The only mentions I can find are the papers from Martelli and Cassone. Looks like WP:OR to me. Broc (talk) 21:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Technology,  and Italy. Broc (talk) 21:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: the only mention of the term I can find is in the paper cited, it does not appear to be used elsewhere. Not yet notable, if the concept is mentioned in other journal papers, might be notable. Oaktree b (talk) 00:18, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Define a threshold of how many citations a paper must have before being considered. Also, there are papers being cited multiple times -and are therefore "notable"- because they are wrong. Is "Nature Communication" not a "notable" journal? Bender bonder (talk) 10:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * However, after reading the TOOSOON guideline I agree this article should be postponed. Bender bonder (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: too soon for a page; I agree that we're looking at primary sources only, from one group only, the work of Fausto Martelli and colleagues. The topics needs reviews published by other groups to establish notability. Klbrain (talk) 10:00, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not one group only, it's a collaboration of two groups and the paper cites other groups. Scientific papers are published after having been reviewed. Define a threshold of how many citations a paper must have before being considered. Also, there are papers being cited multiple times -and are therefore "notable"- because they are wrong. Bender bonder (talk) 10:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * However, after reading the TOOSOON guideline I agree this article should be postponed. Bender bonder (talk) 10:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article is based on two recently published primary sources from the same group, which is a sign of WP:TOOSOON. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not the same group. This is a collaboration from two different groups who put together different expertises. Bender bonder (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * After reading the TOOSOON guideline I agree this article should be postponed. Bender bonder (talk) 10:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is only hypothetical, with results by computation. Until this is confirmed by an experiment we cannot say this is even real. Pure water when exposed to electric field of 1MV/m does start to have interesting properties, eg it can form bridges. But this needs fields 1000 times stronger, hard to do in bulk. An unconfirmed idea may be notable, but it would have to prove itself, by being published on by multiple independent authors. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and delete all "hypothetical" works including basically everything in Math. Bender bonder (talk) 10:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, based on this reasoning you should mark for deletion String Theory, or M-Theory. Bender bonder (talk) 10:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete. Orienting water and other molecules in electric fields is well known, see Electroviscous effects (which needs expansion) and Electrohydrodynamics as well as related material. While the science is OK, it is not new. This is probably why it is not well cited. I am also not sure about the notability of Fausto Martelli.Ldm1954 (talk) 00:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Addendum: There is a new AfC page Draft:Electrofreezing that has just appeared also from @Bender bonder. That page states that the science dates back to 1892. That this page has been written ignoring the prior science that @Bender bonder's own actions indicate he knows implies to me a case for Speedy Delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Addendum 2 It should be noted that the pages Fausto Martelli is also from @Bender bonder. I have to wonder about WP:COI, I don't have rights to check. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2024 (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.