Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth-harmonic generation


 * 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. Speedy Delete as nonsensical hoax.  DGG ( talk ) 01:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Fourth-harmonic_generation
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No sources given for this 'remarkable' discovery, that reads a bit dubious to me. Robert Keiden (talk) 05:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, if not speedy delete as hoax. There are no sources on the article and I can't find any sources out on the internet that back up that this exists, let alone is something that is notable and is anything other than something someone came up with one day via their own personal research. Even if we had the person's personal research, there wouldn't be anything to back up that the conclusions are valid or to show that they have any merit. Coming up with something does not give notability, no matter how exciting the scientist or person might think it is. It might very well be, but we need RS to show notability. This could be speedied as a hoax since there is nothing out there to suggest that this particular theory of FHG exists anywhere except for on this Wikipedia page. As a side note to admins, the content from this article is also on the user talk page of the original editor.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:V. VQuakr (talk) 07:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Found plenty of sources, but all of them talked about generating fourth harmonics in the context of sound and acoustics. I find it suspicious that somebody would have named this hormone as such when it has such an obvious clash with an existing term. -- Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   11:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * speedily eradicate as patent hoax and nonsense. Searching for "FHG hormone" requires excluding us first and then the Harvard Family Health Group, and after that the hits break up into random garbage. It's not really even coherent as it stands. Mangoe (talk) 15:36, 10 September 2012 (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.