Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extended Heim Theory

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extended Heim Theory[edit]

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

Article reads like promotional of a non-notable fringe theory, if not complete crackpottery. If an article starts: "[It] is an entirely novel and consistent purely geometric theory", it starts wrong. (I would have nominated it for cleanup first, but I don't thing any part of the article is salvageable.) Delete (and possibly redirect to Heim theory), and remove any mention of it from Fine structure constant and any other related article. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I second that, as I already said in the Talk page, this entry is completely inappropriate for wikipedia (if not plain nonsense), and the sheer extent of the article and the mountain of questionable maths content will be very misleading as an unsuspecting reader might actually think that it is legit and at the same level as peer reviewed science content. Just delete it. Aknochel (talk) 10:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reasons stated by Mike. --Steve (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails notability; I can find no literature on this. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 09:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pseudo-scientific garbage. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:27, 2 August 2010 (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.