Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uniform field theory

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:00, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform field theory

[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)

Article only has 1 source that is mis-attributed and with an incorrect title; the relevant author that should be S. Butterworth, and in the source "Uniform theory" is in quotation marks. The page and the reference suggest that there should be an equation, but no equation is provided in either.

I found another much more detailed paper by S. Butterworth that uses the phrase "Uniform field theory" ^[1], however it looks like he is using in an informal manner to refer to the assumption he made to help with his derivation rather than it being an actual theory. As for the actual equations he produces, the physics is going a bit above my head, but I think relevant information belongs in Inductance if it is not already there.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions.User:Giuliotf 18:03, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ S. Butterworth, III. Eddy-current losses in cylindrical conductors, with special applications to the alternating current resistances of short coils, Philosphical Transactions of the Royal Society A (1 January 1922).

Delete per WP:DICDEF, although a selective merge is appropriate. Bearian (talk) 05:07, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:01, 22 February 2025 (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.

[1] S. Butterworth, III. Eddy-current losses in cylindrical conductors, with special applications to the alternating current resistances of short coils, Philosphical Transactions of the Royal Society A (1 January 1922).

[1]