The result was keep. A lot of the arguments given in this discussion are not valid arguments for deletion, and participants who have not yet done so would be well advised to read Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. After excluding these arguments, there is consensus that the coverage in independent reliable sources is enough to satisfy the general notability guideline (even if we do not count nyteknik.se). There doesn't seem to be much support for a merge, and a few of the merge arguments were based on E-Cat's fringe status, which in itself is not a valid argument for merging or for deletion. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 13:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Delete this article because it represents just undue weight to a device impossible even only to define with independent sources (the definition that is actually written in the page is wrong and unsupported, more details can be found here). TheNextFuture ( talk) 15:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)— TheNextFuture ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Keep if for no other reason than to preserve the edit history so that when the truth is known, we can track the evolution of a controversial topic. Jim Bowery ( talk) 22:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC) reply
off-topic WP:OR about primary sources of no relevence to the article, and even less to this discussion |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Alanf777 ( talk) 00:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC) reply
|
Since the original proposer of the Delete seems to have disappeared, and since there seems to be an overwhelming majority for keep -- there's only ONE other vote for delete (and only a few arguing for a merge)--- isn't it time to wrap this up? And put a time limit (say a year) before any other nomination is accepted ? Alanf777 ( talk) 22:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC) reply