Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G7FEK Nested Marconi Antenna


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 22:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

G7FEK Nested Marconi Antenna

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

I stumbled upon this article which was blanked by its own author, but for unclear reasons. I've reverted because I though this was notable and could be turned into a solid start/C-class article, but upon further reading, this turns out to be an amateur project which admitedly gathered little attention, probably written by the guy who made the page. It's a very interesting project, and I liked reading the links given. However, with little-to-no coverage by external sources, it unfortunetaly does not meet WP:N. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 05:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom McMarcoP (talk) 08:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Odd I guess if the original author can't find sources fine as I didn't either on a quick google check. However, while there did seem to be some model/simulations published, I would think most of the initial publications would be blog or forum posts from DX'ers in urban areas who got some specific results to report. Presumably this would at some point translate into more journal coverage(CQ magazine for example or maybe various popular press accounts ) but that doesn't seem to be there yet. I used to have an Advanced license but I wasn't aware they lifted morse requirement- too bad since that is still hard to beat for bandwidth and actually introduces people to the idea of data compression. I'm still not sure why a licensed amateur radio shack is not inherently less notable than another version of 2 guys telling jokes during drive time but I've always been a bit odd myself. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 11:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 03:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Explanation I published this article in order to share the history of the antenna and make it generally available for the Amateur Radio Community. I later blanked the article when WP automatically flagged as possible conflict of interest. I assumed the article did not meet guidelines even though it is non commercial and talks about the antenna rather than me!! I therefore blanked the article. I am new to wikipedia and am not 100% sure how best to use the system and this is my first attempt at adding content. Like many in the scientific community I am a geek and spend most of my life hidden away in a workshop. Publishing any of my work is new to me. I would like to see more Radio Amateurs with small gardens try versions of this antenna, as it has proved to work better than some other similar sized antennas and has good multiband properties. I have used it for 20 years and it works. Others have asked me why I don't publish it, so here it is. It is entirely an Amateur and non commercial project and all the tests and validations of the design will most likely be carried out by other Amateurs and published in blogs, online forums and Amateur Radio Journals etc. A search will reveal both users and some articles. Please publish this article or delete it as you feel fit. --G7fek (talk) 11:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Well the main concern here is notability, the rest is simple cleanup. If you can find us sources mentioning this antenna has made an impact in the amateur radio community, at least at the regional/national level (aka bigger than just Devon county), perhaps like having an article in print media (for instance in an amateur radio magazine), etc... Your own website can be used for technical details, and events that happened, but notability and importance have to be established externally. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 15:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete if no third party sources are found and Keep if found. I respect the article and the author, but WP is not a right place for original research, for so many obvious reasons.. Even if it is deleted here, I encourage the author to publish it somewhere else (wikibooks .. don't know) Materialscientist (talk) 12:33, 20 August 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.