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) 21:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)reply
Continuity test seems to be two articles now, the original one having to do with electronics and a new one added recently by
User:Yuanfangdelang. It would probably be best just to revert the additions in this case.--
RDBury (
talk) 02:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)reply
What a mess You have to read several sentences into the article before you come to anything about the alleged grounds for notability. Is he a politician, a novelist, a theologian, an athlete,.....or what?? If the article is kept, it should get drastically cleaned up. I'll be back.......
Michael Hardy (
talk) 02:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. No mathematical hits on GS.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 02:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC).reply
Delete No evidence of notability per either
WP:BIO or
WP:PROF. GS
[1] shows nothing relevant (note that there is a chemist with the same name).
Nsk92 (
talk) 02:16, 29 January 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.