Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Principle of Energy Consumption

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. T. Canens (talk) 23:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First Principle of Energy Consumption

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pure WP:ESSAY. Article is not written in an encyclopedic tone, and title is not relevant for an encyclopedia. — Timneu22 · talk 16:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in this form, verging on a G11 Speedy, as this all seems to be a plug for the book that is the only reference. It certainly meets the "would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic" clause of G11, the only question remaining is whether it is "exclusively promotional". Beyond the essay-like tone and the one reference raising serious original research concerns, I would want to see third-party sources for this theory to establish its notability. Much of the theory has already been included in the articles on the book itself and the author. Arakunem^Talk 16:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's really just an essay based on a summary of a specific book -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This concept is an important contribution to the global energy debate. It reveals a 6000 year-old relationship that correlates personal wealth and well-being directly with energy consumption. It is the idea being used behind many pragmatic and innovative solutions being put forward in the marketplace for curbing energy appetites, from some of the largest corporations in America. It is thought that it will help provide a solution that is not only virtuous, but also financially appealing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Communications1234 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You use words like "provide a solution" and "financially appealing"; this is an encyclopedia... so how does this article help an encyclopedia? — Timneu22 · talk 18:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The idea is very current, and being used behind economic derivative models. This article based on facts and concrete data, nonetheless, historical reference is very powerful in solving today’s problems. No reason to be overtly dismissive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Communications1234 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide references from multiple reliable sources to attest to its current notability? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as spam. The article outlines a problem, and tells us that The End of Energy Obesity can provide us the solution. The article does not provide the solution, but rather promises the solution in a book. Seems like a pretty blatant ad to me. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. Johnfos (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not only is it an essay (rather than an encyclopaedia article), it's also thinly disguised advertising for a book. Neither of which we want here. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per Lankiveil. Beagel (talk) 17:37, 28 June 2010 (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.