Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fractional quantum mechanics

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. ✗plicit 14:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fractional quantum mechanics edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article was created by Nlaskin who appears to be the primary author of this concept. There are long standing concerns on the talk page over this COI and promotional bias. I quote from 178.197.232.148 at the talk page As mentioned elsewhere, this theory is an ad hoc modification of quantum mechanics without any serious motivation or application. It is also the fruit of one person, which has not attracted interest or recognition in the physics community. Also, the number of times the author's name is mentioned on this page and on the page on Fractional Schrödinger equation is striking. Fractional Schrödinger equation currently redirects here, but the author is persistently recreating it. This redirect should also be deleted. Polyamorph (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Polyamorph (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Polyamorph (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages as detailed in my nom above, it is nothing more than a vanity project by Nlaskin

Delete Promotional article about fringe topic written by main author. Clearly doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Note that the author has also written Fractional Poisson process to promote his work, and just added a section about it in Fractional calculus. I think we're also dealing with a case of WP:NOTHERE. Tercer (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, editor clearly WP:NOTHERE, they're only interested in promoting their research. WP:TNT is the only solution these vanity pages. Polyamorph (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would make sense to bundle Fractional Poisson process in this AfD. Tercer (talk) 15:01, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added above. Polyamorph (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all including Fractional Poisson process. This is a bit of a tricky case, since references do exist, and some of them might even qualify as independent, secondary sources. But the sheer extent of the COI means that we can't trust any of the material to be worth keeping and editing. For example, every bullet point under "Further reading" in multiple pages would have to be checked to make sure it's actually about the page topic, rather than merely using similar-sounding terminology. Every historical statement and claim of credit would have to be interrogated, and the selection of topics couldn't be taken to indicate a third-party assessment of what's interesting. (None of the "Physical applications" in Fractional Schrödinger equation are physical applications, for instance; they're all equations for the sake of equations, with one model thrown in that makes a gesture at possible relevance to an actual physical system.) I'm all for articles on niche topics, but these pages amount to using Wikipedia as a personal website. Volunteers who can work on specialized physics content are in short supply, and every minute spent cleaning up after somebody's ego is a waste of a scarce resource. In short, WP:TNT. XOR'easter (talk) 16:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Polyamorph and XOR'easter. --Chetvorno^TALK 17:06, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per XOR'easter. — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Per XOR'easter. JBchrch talk 15:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good call, Delete all: per the rationale of XOR'easter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otr500 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all clear WP:OR violation. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:37, 17 July 2021 (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.