Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quantized spacetime Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantized_spacetime

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 redirect to quantum spacetime. To facilitate a possible merge later, I have moved the article to userspace: User:Pekka.virta/Quantized spacetime. Chutznik (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quantized spacetime

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

Looks like original research, i.e. someone's own speculation mixed in with an odd combination of physics facts. No ghits, the references are on different subject and as far as I can tell say nothing about the topic. There's a merge discussion but it's going nowhere and I don't think there's anything here worth merging. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 11:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was about to say delete as OR/hoax or any combination thereof. But looking at article creator contribs, this leads me to assume good faith, unfamiliarity with WP guidelines, less than optimal communication skills in writing, and a contribution in a highly exotic subfield of Spacetime. I think it's wrong to take it to AfD. The merge target is not a very active page and they should be given at least some months time to discuss. I the meantime WP may host a difficult-to-understand article which MAY be legit, may be merged or (likely) may be deleted. I see no hurry though, there is no harm done, while we wait for improvement. Power.corrupts (talk) 13:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article creator comments on the talk page: "Use of the terminology is not established in physics", apparently implying that this article covers the mathematical implications. Under these circumstances, a merge with a physics subject as suggested would seem to be questionable to me. However, he earlier stated that "The word 'quantized' is not used in math." Now I am at a loss as to what s/he wants to say and suggest to userfy. --Pgallert (talk) 14:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Quantum spacetime. As this is the major topic discussed by this article. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect as suggested - more like a copyvio or synthesis - I have submitted articles on this topic, so it's not OR. Bearian (talk) 23:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to quantum spacetime, as an {{R from alternate name}}. 76.66.192.206 (talk) 05:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to quantum spacetime. This isn't exactly original research as the nominator and some commentators here proclaim, but the article does read a bit {{essay-like}}. Pcap ping 07:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to quantum spacetime, which covers the subject much better than this poorly-written essay does. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:07, 28 January 2010 (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.