Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy quality

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 of the debate was no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 11:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Energy quality[edit]

This afd nomination was incomplete. The nominator's reasoning was that it is original research. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:49, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of a number of related deletion debates, you may wish to study all of them before forming a judgment. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 21:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is a fellow called Odum wo appears to be an ecologist, and may have written about topics such as this. However, the thing described in this article appears to be original research having little or no bearing on Odum's work. linas 02:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Odum's papers are well-cited by other scientists in the field, and the quality of energy has been discussed by other s also. I agree that the current content is poorly written, but that is not a reason to delete a page on Wikipedia. Karol 16:19, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - H.T. Odum is a was a highly respected scientist and one of the founders of ecosystem ecology and ecological economics. This is real, published and significant. Guettarda 03:21, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The example under question of quantifying enegy quality was a clarification of Odum's example on p.251. This can be placed in the discussion section if that meets with approval, and a blockquote from Odum's text inserted instead (I don't think the example is as clear but if you want it please insert it - you are more than welcome). However energy quality is a fact of Odum's text. Linas is referred to p.251 of Ecological and General Systems to verify. Sholto Maud 03:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have articles about more obscure concepts that this well-cited one. Karol 06:07, 2 December 2005 (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.