Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planet-4D

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Planet-4D

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find any evidence that this topic has been discussed at all in any reliable sources that are independent of its creator Gilles Baroin (also on AfD). So it seems WP:TOOSOON to have an article on this topic, if ever. Sławomir Biały (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's discussed in passing in arXiv:1208.4774, which is not by Baroin. But I don't think that's enough for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 January 12. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 00:42, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 January 15. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 03:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The Arxiv paper mentioned above was by Amiot, a collaborator of Baroin, so independence is questionable. I was unable to find independent sources discussing this topic and so it seems to fail general notability guidelines per WP:GNG. I agree that this may be a case of WP:TOOSOON for RS to develop. --Mark viking (talk) 18:54, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 January 18. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Offline 04:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At least for now, until it gets enough reliable coverage to pass GNG.LM2000 (talk) 04:45, 18 January 2014 (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.