| Revision as of 12:59, 18 September 2007 editSuva (talk | contribs)1,238 edits →Moderated nuclear explosion: Factuality.← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:01, 18 September 2007 edit undoPaul Pieniezny (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,782 edits →Moderated nuclear explosion: oops ... (cannot put sock in invisible text here ...)Next edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| *'''Delete''' Although it may be factual, how would anyone know to look up this apparently novel term? --] 12:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' Although it may be factual, how would anyone know to look up this apparently novel term? --] 12:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Completely unused neologism that has had some serious concerns raised about its validity in its talk that have not been adressed.--] 12:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' Completely unused neologism that has had some serious concerns raised about its validity in its talk that have not been adressed.--] 12:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Keep''' though probably "Rename". Stalking. Disruptive behaviour. WP:POINT. User:Suva suddenly finds out Petri has another side, changes his signature so that people will not immediately notice he is the same editor and starts an AFD against one of the opponents and beloved targets of the usual bunch of |
* '''Keep''' though probably "Rename". Stalking. Disruptive behaviour. WP:POINT. User:Suva suddenly finds out Petri has another side, changes his signature so that people will not immediately notice he is the same editor and starts an AFD against one of the opponents and beloved targets of the usual bunch of meatpuppets (surprise, surprise, one of them is here already). There are ways of helping an anonymous contributor, of course, but this way - no way, Jose. I am not an expert, but I did find a number of times the term "moderated nuclear fission", which also sounds new to me, so perhaps this is a terminological problem. --] 12:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Comment''': I checked with my friend who teaches nuclear physics in university and he says the factuality of this article seems to be incorrect as well. ] is unrelated to the topic. And although the concept has some basis, the information is seriously misinterpreted in this article. ] <small>]</small> 12:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | * '''Comment''': I checked with my friend who teaches nuclear physics in university and he says the factuality of this article seems to be incorrect as well. ] is unrelated to the topic. And although the concept has some basis, the information is seriously misinterpreted in this article. ] <small>]</small> 12:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 13:01, 18 September 2007
Moderated nuclear explosion
- Moderated nuclear explosion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Possibly hoax, or WP:OR as discussed on Talk. 0 google hits, and using suspicious terms. Владимир И. Сува Чего? 08:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - Bad faith nomination. Part of a pattern of stalking and disruptive editing now discussed at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren. -- Petri Krohn 09:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Assume good faith. Your talk page happens to be in my watchlist, for whatever reasons (possibly because I had option "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" on for some time). I just happened to notice the conversation and followed the article talk page. The anonymous user who added speedy deletion template was obviously not skilled enought to start AFD procedude, so I decided to help him/her out. Владимир И. Сува Чего? 10:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete 0 Google results for the term "Moderated nuclear explosion" (well, actually, now there are 2 -- both come back to Misplaced Pages). Ewlyahoocom 09:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete neologism. ffm 12:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Although it may be factual, how would anyone know to look up this apparently novel term? --Mud4t 12:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Completely unused neologism that has had some serious concerns raised about its validity in its talk that have not been adressed.--Alexia Death the Grey 12:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep though probably "Rename". Stalking. Disruptive behaviour. WP:POINT. User:Suva suddenly finds out Petri has another side, changes his signature so that people will not immediately notice he is the same editor and starts an AFD against one of the opponents and beloved targets of the usual bunch of meatpuppets (surprise, surprise, one of them is here already). There are ways of helping an anonymous contributor, of course, but this way - no way, Jose. I am not an expert, but I did find a number of times the term "moderated nuclear fission", which also sounds new to me, so perhaps this is a terminological problem. --Pan Gerwazy 12:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: I checked with my friend who teaches nuclear physics in university and he says the factuality of this article seems to be incorrect as well. Chernobyl_disaster is unrelated to the topic. And although the concept has some basis, the information is seriously misinterpreted in this article. Владимир И. Сува Чего? 12:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)