Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diadem (physics)

Diadem (physics)

This is not physics, this is nonsense. --Pjacobi 12:29, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)

• I do not like green eggs and ham. I do not like them, Sam I Am. I do not like them with the Diaminic Core. I do not like them with a Spatial Traversal Door. Delete. --Zarquon 14:43, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • hahaha Ground 14:59, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Seems like nonsense to me. Josh Cherry 14:49, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• See, when you postulate special kinds of wormholes (possible exception if you're Kip Thorne), as opposed to the common-or-garden normal kind, that's usually a bad sign. Delete, and consign to the Diamanic Core... Shimgray 16:51, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, all one needs now is a note from the author saying this idea was graciously provided by extra-terrestrial visitors. Original research, ramblings. Wyss 18:11, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Sorry, but you guys won't be ready for this for another 600 of your earth years at the earliest. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:32, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Patent nonsense. (!!!!) It appears that this, uh, jewelled crown of an article has been in the Diadem article since it was contributed 23:29, 7 Nov 2004 by 155.31.31.58. On 18:05, 13 Dec 2004 J3ff began work on making Diadem into a disambiguation page, and created this article from the "info" in Diadem. Since then, the article has had several editors work on it, correcting spelling errors and typos, assigning categories to it, etc. We're probably lucky nobody tried to create articles for the red-links. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:45, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I would have given it a {{nonsense}} tag. Jeff Knaggs|Talk 22:50, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Due to the fact that time is relevant, I propose that we speedy it, when the criteria are expanded. Alphax (t) (c) (e) 04:12, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Bollocks (physics). No, really, Delete. DJ Clayworth 05:20, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• go to warp 9, go back in time and delete' this last november Pedant