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 delete.  Denelson83  08:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Planetenergy[edit]

plus Image:S mech11.png

Blatant advertising for a new clean efficient alternative energy source. The article and the website to which it links are both very coy about what the source is - smacks of perpetual motion machines to me. -- RHaworth 11:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete speculation, advertising, fails WP:CORP and as per above apparently fails the laws of thermodynamics. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 11:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, any article that states the concept/device violates the laws of thermodynamics probably should only be included if it is extremely notable for some reason. -- Kjkolb 21:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without regard to the above. Article is utter nonsense. It contains multiple mispellings and failures of grammar combined with awkward phrasing apparently designed to conceal that it's not actually saying anything. I'd almost nominate it for BJAODN:

• "Thermodynamics do not apply to us."
• "Our technology does not rely on any inputs."

The article is just pure nonsense about a company that hasn't done anything yet. WP:NOT a crystal ball. --Stephen Deken 22:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete. What could possibly be in accordance with known laws of physics where the first and second laws of thermodynamics do not apply? Durova 22:41, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Wow, the "first and second thermodynamic law do not apply to this study." They must be really on to something new and important! I suppose it keeps them so busy that they don't have time to spell "physics" correctly, either. Of course, if it were a famous hoax it might be worthy of an article, but since it's not, strong delete. Bikeable 22:43, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete may be eligible for speedy deletion given the following message that was posted to the help e-mail list. We would like to delete the article Planetenergy, what we placed by October 10, 2005.We appreciated the opportunity to place articles, but we dislike the incompetent comments of users. How do we proceed?

Administration Planetenergy. It may be possible to speedy delete this under category G7. Capitalistroadster 23:39, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above comments Melchoir 23:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per request on helpdesk-l Alphax ^τεχ 04:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Durova. Xoloz 16:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I've moved the large block of discussion to, appropriately enough, the talk page.  RasputinAXP  T C 20:00, 14 November 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.