Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyroscopic-aether

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. Sr13 02:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Gyroscopic-aether

Gyroscopic-aether (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Neologism apparently from 1980, never came into popular use; definition from Merriam-Webster Open Dictionary (? copyvio). Originally created by an editor with the same name as the person who is reported to have coined the term. Risker 02:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:VERIFY and WP:NOT#CRYSTAL --Javit 02:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy delete, I'm going with nonsense here. The article is basically a dictionary definition, has nothing more than a link to Merriam Webster's list of new words (on which this is not included, apparently), but a search on M-W's open dictionary has something of a definition - which reminds me of things I see in Urban Dictionary. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Oh, it *is* at that link on the page, sort of - click "last" to go to the last page of the open dictionary listings for "G" and you will see that it was added there by a person using the same name as the editor who created the article here. Risker 04:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. I'd like to throw in WP:BOLLOCKS, and WP:OR. It borders on nonsense as well. The end reads like spam...What would possess someone to theorize about aether fields nowadays? Someguy1221 06:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 17:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete In addition to what others have metnioned, the term seems to lack notability and the article does not seem to be verifiable. (There 5 Google hits after removing sites that mention Wikedpedia and all of them were flaky.) Cardamon 01:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

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.

It would appear that the parties who are providing their sarcastic review of the meaning of "Gyroscopic aether," 

are not in truth providing any scientific support to their apparently un-researched criticism.

Gyroscopic aether is simply a means of describing the reality of what actually is a verified scientific understanding that has not been or that has been withheld from conventional scientific focus, and establishment directed thinking and disciplines. In order to explain this sector of scientific understanding, the term, "Gyroscopic aether," is a means for simply interpreting this sector of physical reality and how the laws of nature actually enact our physical world as an interpretive expression for identifying this scientific understanding that has not recognized up until this term was created by Will P. Wilson. For example, consider the reference: "Anti-gravity," and that this term has now become a conventional term of reference for types of technology for example: "UFO," that is not a normally identifiable or understood phenomena by normal aeronautical perspective. But in order to explain how a person might actually explain the interpretation of these little understood technologies that are not comprehended by normal conventional science.

So thereof, it was important to realize that another term that may better explain or provide a more clear understanding of this technology had to be transcended and established in order to more respectively understand how this technology actually works due to the term anti-gravity not explaining anything rather then it being a term that only describes the result of interpreting the technology by generalized observations.

For example, anti-gravity does not explain a means of truly understanding what a UFO technological event might incur such as when someone views a UFO for example, but anti-gravity does not explain how the UFO is actually manifesting itself in a world where the common public have a very limited means of understanding what they are viewing or interpreting. Gyroscopic Aether does provide a better explanation and or more clear interpretation thus providing a better means for understanding how for example a UFO technology may actually operate as, or how other scientific interpretations where the observer under conventionalized understanding does not have a clear understanding of what they are viewing. Gyroscopic aether is simply providing a more simple means for more accurately identifying and a more clearly understanding how a UFO technology might actually operate as, and perform aeronautical maneuvering without having the means of what the common person would think of as being winged aircraft based on venturi atmospheric physics. A term was needed to better interpret and to better explain how to interpret and communicate this mostly still little understood scientific sector. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Will P. Wilson [email protected], producer of the All Day Live weekly television program from 2002 to now, from www.scantv.org and now broadcasting on local Northwest cable TV and on-line from SCCTV in Seattle starting on August 1, 2011. 24.19.133.11 (talk) 05:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)