Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wigner fusion


 * 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. While the conflict of interest is not a valid reason to delete, the quick nomination is - while certainly BITEy - not a reason to keep. In the end, consensus is that the subject is not notable (at this time).  So Why  13:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Wigner fusion

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't find many references to assert notability from google search. Created by possible COI user. bojo &#124;  talk  13:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I just created this page in Hungarian as well, although I've found a couple of references to our sites, but I can tell you more if you would please specifiy what kind of references would you require. Wigner fusion (talk) 13:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I would suggest looking for articles that focus on the facility or organization, not necessarily on something that they are doing or planning. Something that is independent of the subject, but that tells someone why the subject is important or unique or otherwise notable. Also, note that an article with "We are..." as opposed to "Wigner Fusion is..." makes me think that someone from Wigner Fusion wrote the article - and that would violate several policies. Have a look at our policy on writing from a neutral point of view for guidance. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 03:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The nomination comes 4 minutes after the creation of the article, and is against WP:BITE. The user might be having a COI issue, and it is being/will be discussed on their talk page. Meanwhile, I will try changing the tone of the article to be more neutral. I would suggest withdrawing the quick nomination, and nominating again in a week or so if the current problems seem unaddressed. RoCo (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep for time being. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC).
 * Comment. Hi, would you consider not to delete this page and remove the article-for-deletion notice please? The user name conflict has been solved and as I can see the text have been fixed. Many thanks. Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 08:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Debates of this type usually last 7 days. This gives editors who might not visit the article regularly a chance to see and comment on whether the article should be deleted. That said, if the concerns above have been addressed, then the article will likely be kept and the notices removed. If you want to edit the article to address some of those concerns (say, by making it more neutral or adding additional sources or whatever), that would go a long way to helping make sure the article is Kept. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 12:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Hi, the article was modified to be more neutral and more external sources have been added. Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 12:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   04:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC) Comment Sorry but you are wrong I could find reliable sources mentioning Wigner fusion, also dozens of images can be found in Google photos search, try regular search not news Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 07:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC) Comment Fair enough Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 10:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Please keep this page since it was modified to be more neutral and more external sources have been added. Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 08:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The keep !votes above are not based on WP:PAG, and there is no coverage in reliable sources (0 Google news results). —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 22:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The creator of the article is in conflict of interest, and notability can't be established. If the subject is notable, someone else will create the article. KarlPopper y (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2017 (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.