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 of the debate was no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 11:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Energy quality[edit]

This afd nomination was incomplete. The nominator's reasoning was that it is original research. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:49, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of a number of related deletion debates, you may wish to study all of them before forming a judgment. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 21:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Odum's papers are well-cited by other scientists in the field, and the quality of energy has been discussed by other s also. I agree that the current content is poorly written, but that is not a reason to delete a page on Wikipedia. Karol 16:19, 4 December 2005 (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.