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.
Delete Per nom. I nominated this for speedy, viewing this as original research, unsourced, and yielding no Google hits, a test page at best. I would have marked it as nonsense, but I know that some would make the literal interpretation that the article is coherent, and thus... JNW (talk) 15:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Rationale for not applying speedy understood and appreciated. It just looked like a freshman level test balloon, a first-time contribution, so one had hoped that a speedy death would be most merciful. JNW (talk) 16:36, 14 November 2008 (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.