Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metastable inner-shell molecular state

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. Sandstein 08:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Metastable inner-shell molecular state

[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)

This article, about the research of Young K. Bae, was created by Young K. Bae him/herself. The article does not cite any references that establish notability. Most of the references are to Bae's own papers. The other references all predate Bei's 2008 proposal of MIMS. I did some quick Google/Scholar/Books searches which turned up only one use of the term by someone other than Bae, and that was a conference presentation by some of Bae's coauthors from other papers. Bae's papers have very few citations, most of which are other papers by Bae. I didn't find anything that could establish that the topic is notable. Srleffler (talk) 03:29, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:18, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sourcing completely inadequate. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Keep The topic is important. Perhaps it should be renamed to quasimolecule as the concept and study was around before Bae came up with the term "metastable inner-shell molecular state". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on the WP:TNT principle. Renaming to a better-established term would give a biased and COI-inflected presentation of that topic which would require effort comparable to writing a new article to correct. XOR'easter (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional material on the author's own work that does not appear to be covered by other researchers as a notable topic. Reywas92^Talk 18:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree that quasimolecule is a notable subject and should be created, but I also agree that this page is a self-serving TNT case. Bae's work, by itself, does not appear to be notable. If the history section gave a clear development of the subject there might be something retrievable in the page, but even in the first section (which covers the 1930s) Bae cannot resist shoehorning in his own research out of historical context. XOR'easter is right, starting from a blank page is going to be easier. SpinningSpark 00:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OR and WP:SPAM. We follow; we don't publish research news. Bearian (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2019 (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.