Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quantum Fields Fluctuations, Time stop

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 Speedy delete a11, obvious original research, author expressly states that he made up this theory. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum Fields Fluctuations, Time stop

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

Article is incomprehensible. It clearly is meant to have some technical meaning, but it is impossible to determine what that meaning is. It isn't patent nonsense, but it isn't any more informative than if it were. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (maybe speedy). Honestly I think it qualifies for G1 (WP:PATENT says [c]ontent that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confusing that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it. If the meaning cannot be identified, it is impossible to accurately copy-edit the text., and I think that applies here. But no rush, I suppose. Anyway, the content is unsalvageable because no one knows what is intended, there is no merge target for the same reason, and the title is not a plausible search term or link target so there's no redirect target either. --Trovatore (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In addition to the points above, the article is clearly original research by the author (it even includes his name on the first line). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Should an admin deem speedy deletion desirable, I feel this satisfied CSD#A11. This is fringe physics, self-avowedly created by the article editor, with no evidence of wider acceptance or significance. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:15, 28 September 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.