Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isodiasphere
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Delete (aeropagitica) (talk) 16:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Isodiasphere[edit]
Neologism and/or non-notable and/or original reasearch. Can't find any significant reference to this term. Google "Isodiasphere -wikipedia" only gives 11 hits. None seem relevant. --BluePlatypus 17:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A discussion of this article can be found at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Is_this_a_hoax.3F.
- Delete, unless documentation of use of this term can be provided. A literature search turns up no mention of this term in any chemistry or physics scientific journal. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, as per my comments at the Ref Desk. This looks increasingly like someone's "how long does nonsense stay around in Wikipeda" social experiment. --Bth 18:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I can't find anything in journals on this topic either. Some mentioning of this in foreign language articles, but not something I would consider worthy of an article yet. --HappyCamper 18:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete seems nonnoteable and probably also fictitious. WAS 4.250 19:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per all of the above. Chuck 19:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom.-gadfium 21:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. - mako 00:13, 15 April 2006 (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.