Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foam Field Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Foam_Field

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. postdlf (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Foam Field (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Foam Field appears to be a real thing but some part of the page make no sense. Especially, the section "Work on unsolved problems in physics" seems unrelated and pasted from somewhere else. I would suggest delete and recreate but I would like more opinions. Magioladitis (talk) 22:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Non-notable unpublished WP:FRINGE theory, and so poorly expressed as to almost be WP:Patent nonsense. The author of the article is the same "David Woroner MA Industrial Tech" who proposed the idea, so there is a serious WP:COI here too. -- 120.23.74.190 (talk) 23:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:OR, and WP:Patent nonsense.PianoDan (talk) 14:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this is incoherent. Maybe redirect to quantum foam, after application of WP:TNT. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.