Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Quantum Finance

This article is entirely nonsensical and is an obvious attemptat self promotion by authors of the references cited at the end. 'Quantum finance' has been from the beginning a severely misguided research topic. It is a pity that the previous attempt at deleting the article was not followed. Some have cited the fact that there are 2 books on the topic as proof that it is a 'serious topic'. This amazes me: anything printed on paper becomes 'serious' or scientifically deserving?


 * Keep Very well referenced article that seems to satisfy any and all notability requirements, assuming the nominated article is Quantum Finance.  Gtwfan52 (talk) 01:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment This nomination is so poorly formed that I am not even sure what was nominated.  I guessed.  The unsigned nominator seems to have a POV issue with the article, which has been around since 4/2011. Gtwfan52 (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)