Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhatia Hazarika Limit

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. Mojo Hand (talk) 03:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhatia Hazarika Limit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Contested PROD by the Article's creator. Nominating per Graeme Bartlett's PROD: "This term does not appear in any journals or any real books. It only appears to be written about by Bhatia Hazarika" GPL93 (talk) 23:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete This term does not appear in any journals or any real books. It only appears to be written about by Bhatia Hazarika. I did a search for this term in journals, -- nothing at all, in books, only some self published e-book. No one else is using this term. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It would appear that the article's creator is Bhatia Hazarika. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I know I should really edit it to correct it, but I'm finding it difficult to change the beautiful phrase, "neutron star smash breaks universe". Phil Bridger (talk) 19:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not appear to have sufficient scientific notability or independent reliable sources. Aldebarium (talk) 19:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is pretty clearly a neologism pushed by the creator. Wrong way round, mate; we document it once it has become known, we do not make it known. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per User:GPL93, and thanks for identifying the author. Wikipedia welcomes experts in their fields, but expertise is established by the publication of previously reviewed work, not by the use of Wikipedia. The grammar would need correcting if the article needed keeping otherwise. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:41, 2 May 2020 (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.