Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Testatika (2nd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus. --Ezeu 00:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Testatika
Contrary to the impression one may get from a first look, there are no reliable third-party sources for the subject. Yes, there are reliable sources given, e.g. "Grossner, Nathan R., "Transformers For Electronic Circuits". 1967" -- but that book doesn't mention the Testatika, let alone give hints to build over-unity devices. OTOH those sources which mention "Testatika" are private homepages like http://website.lineone.net/~aarekhu/index.html and http://members.fortunecity.com/geoffegel/testats.htm or a web forum at YahooGroups.

See also:
 * Votes for deletion/Testatika
 * Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2

Please delete.

Pjacobi 09:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep As much as I sympathize with editors striving to produce good articles on subjects dear to the hearts of a small minority with, well, minority views - this appears to be a fairly notable piece of chicanery. --Brianyoumans 10:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep The PDF at the end satisfies me that someone reputable has at least been researching this, so as long as the article's focus is "perpetual motion machine" which clearly "violates the laws of physics", then keep. Better to know about scientific hoaxes than not. BusterD 11:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * strong delete. "the last pdf" is from personal website, hence not a reputable source as well. Better to know about known and scandalous hoaxes. we dont have to know about all brain-damaged people and dont have to disprove every violation of physics claims by sick people and con men. Mukadderat 17:36, 25 October 2006 (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.