Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AC polarity inversion

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 13:23, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AC polarity inversion

[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)

A very confusing article that is entirely unsourced, this appears to be largely original research/synthesis. This started out at the title Phase inversion as a dictionary definition of what phase inversion is, which was then expanded with what appears to have been a load of original research. Chunks of this article don't make sense, e.g. the claim A polarity inversion is neither a time shift nor a phase shift, but simply a swap of plus and minus is wrong in at least a significant number of cases, for a sine wave a swap of sign, 180 degree phase shift and a time delay of 1/2 cycle are all the same thing, and this claim directly contradicts the only sourced version of the article [1] , which claims that this is the Introduction of a phase difference of 180°. The phrase "AC polarity inversion" itself appears to have been invented by the wikipedia editor who moved the page, it does not appear in google scholar, all the google hits appear to be wikipedia mirrors, and it does not appear in google books. I don't see how Phase inversion applied to electronics is a distinct topic from phase inversion applied to other areas of physics, they appear to be the same thing. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 18:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating on behalf of IP 192.76.8.85 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Technology. WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article contains numerous factual errors, and indeed frequently contradicts itself. If the incorrect/unsourced information were removed, there'd be effectively nothing left. There might be enough material specifically about 180° phase shifts to be worth having an article about them, but starting from scratch would probably be preferable to starting from here. I also can't find anything on the subject of "AC polarity inversion" in the reference provided (that doesn't mean it isn't there, just that I can't find it – the reference is a website that consists of hundreds of individual small pages, and links to the website as a whole rather than any single page). --ais523 03:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ais523 The article started off as a clone of https://web.archive.org/web/20130313104528/http://www.atis.org/glossary/definition.aspx?id=2853. The reason you can't find "AC polarity inversion" in the source is because it doesn't exist in the source, "AC polarity inversion" seems to be something that wikipedians have created by adding their own original reasearch and examples to the definition of "phase inversion" until the actual topic it started out as became unrecognisable. Even if reverted back to the properly sourced version I don't think this is a suitable topic for a standalone article - the content here is just a WP:DICDEF, and the concept of phase inversion is already fully explained in Phase (waves) 192.76.8.85 (talk) 05:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per the IP and because "phase inversion" also fails WP:GNG. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:43, 14 July 2022 (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.