Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relativity priority dispute

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 Keep --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relativity priority dispute

An extremely interesting essay with several primary sources cited, obviously the work at least in part of Christopher Bjerknes. However... in as much as it cites wholly primary sources, this is clearly original research. Not to say a proper article could not be written on the dispute, but the dispute is very minor and esoteric and largely pursued by one man. Guy (Help!) 22:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions. —KTC 03:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Check the editing history - this article is the result of the work of multiple people over a long period, compiling information from a lot of different sources, most of them secondary (the real primary sources are identified as such). --Alvestrand 05:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Highly notable topic which encompasses a very significant body of literature. There are a ton of biographies and other works which cover these issues substantially. Bits and pieces of it are original research, but the majority isn't, and deleting this much-worked-on article doesn't make much sense to me. Some primary sources are okay; the article meets Wikipedia:Attribution as far as I can tell. — xDanielx ^T/_C 06:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has plenty of secondary sources and the topic is notable. --131.152.105.20 13:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Work of many people. Not sure how to judge esoteric or whether that is a criteria for deletion E4mmacro 18:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per the above. • Lawrence Cohen 18:32, 14 September 2007 (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.