Revision as of 01:43, 21 June 2005 editSplash (talk | contribs)33,425 edits →[]: d← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:53, 21 June 2005 edit undoXcali (talk | contribs)1,947 edits →[]: vote: deleteNext edit → | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
*Phrase only gets 14 google hits, but it might be one of many terms used to describe a similar concept - in which case, I might vote to keep if it made sense once translated into something more easily understandable. --] ] 22:01, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC) | *Phrase only gets 14 google hits, but it might be one of many terms used to describe a similar concept - in which case, I might vote to keep if it made sense once translated into something more easily understandable. --] ] 22:01, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC) | ||
*'''Delete''' I'm inclined to dismiss this as patent nonsense. At best, it's original research and original speculation tacked on to the name of a paper by Libb Thims (name of the journal in which the article appeared would help with verifying that) and a misapplication of thermodynamics (closed system, people, closed system). No, I take it back, that's not at best. At best, this isn't original research and speculation, just a really sloppy presentation of non-notable pseudoscience. ] 01:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' I'm inclined to dismiss this as patent nonsense. At best, it's original research and original speculation tacked on to the name of a paper by Libb Thims (name of the journal in which the article appeared would help with verifying that) and a misapplication of thermodynamics (closed system, people, closed system). No, I take it back, that's not at best. At best, this isn't original research and speculation, just a really sloppy presentation of non-notable pseudoscience. ] 01:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) | ||
*'''Strong delete'''. I read the text, and I understand the material. It is well-disguised nonsense. It is, for the most part, basic thermodynamics (badly presented, should be in LaTeX) that is dealt with just fine by other, dedicated articles. See, e.g. ], ]. Note that these terms are standard thermo terms. Then, the article goes off the rails and says things like ''"wherein a man M meets or collides in time with a woman W over the substrate surface called |
*'''Strong delete'''. I read the text, and I understand the material. It is well-disguised nonsense. It is, for the most part, basic thermodynamics (badly presented, should be in LaTeX) that is dealt with just fine by other, dedicated articles. See, e.g. ], ]. Note that these terms are standard thermo terms. Then, the article goes off the rails and says things like ''"wherein a man M meets or collides in time with a woman W over the substrate surface called ‘earth’ to form a bonded relationship"'' which is nearly patent nonsense and it goes down hill from there. The website looks professional, to a point, and claims they have a PhD - I reckon it's an elaborate hoax. Further the Google hits deal with the perfectly good topic of human thermo in terms of "how do you keep people cool" and "what sort of ways do humans lose heat/warm up" etc. It's subtle, but I reckon it's nonsense.-] 01:43, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC) | ||
*'''Delete''' It's different than the last article, but "different" does not mean "better" in this case. --] 03:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:53, 21 June 2005
Human thermodynamics
Someone tagged this as a speedy because it's got the same name as recent vfd deleted content, but this text is IMO significantly different. I'm bringing it here to see what the community opinion is before acting. Please be sure to read the text and not just vote based on the previous VFD. - Mgm| 21:37, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Phrase only gets 14 google hits, but it might be one of many terms used to describe a similar concept - in which case, I might vote to keep if it made sense once translated into something more easily understandable. -- BDAbramson 22:01, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC)
- Delete I'm inclined to dismiss this as patent nonsense. At best, it's original research and original speculation tacked on to the name of a paper by Libb Thims (name of the journal in which the article appeared would help with verifying that) and a misapplication of thermodynamics (closed system, people, closed system). No, I take it back, that's not at best. At best, this isn't original research and speculation, just a really sloppy presentation of non-notable pseudoscience. The Literate Engineer 01:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Strong delete. I read the text, and I understand the material. It is well-disguised nonsense. It is, for the most part, basic thermodynamics (badly presented, should be in LaTeX) that is dealt with just fine by other, dedicated articles. See, e.g. entropy, free energy. Note that these terms are standard thermo terms. Then, the article goes off the rails and says things like "wherein a man M meets or collides in time with a woman W over the substrate surface called ‘earth’ to form a bonded relationship" which is nearly patent nonsense and it goes down hill from there. The website looks professional, to a point, and claims they have a PhD - I reckon it's an elaborate hoax. Further the Google hits deal with the perfectly good topic of human thermo in terms of "how do you keep people cool" and "what sort of ways do humans lose heat/warm up" etc. It's subtle, but I reckon it's nonsense.-Splash 01:43, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete It's different than the last article, but "different" does not mean "better" in this case. --Xcali 03:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)