== Comment on deletion policy == 

 i hope it's not inappropriate to have a comment such as this on the talk page. as can be seen above, i got into it a bit regarding an AfD. the full exchange is  here. while that is over and done with, it seems to bring about questions regarding the deletion policy for articles of a particular nature.  

 my position was that the article derivation of the partition function is technically worthless. i assumed that whatever objections raised would be technically sound. when the justification of the first 2 votes to keep seemed to be superficial and had no apparent technical merit, i mentioned the question whether one is actually "required to read the article somewhat intelligently to enter the discussion" (my words), the responses of the two voters were: 

 1. one flat out stated that such requirement is unnecessary. 

 2. the second voter claimed to be insulted and offered further justifications/explanations which reinforces the suspicion that there's no real understanding behind his/her comments. 

 There is nothing uncivil about calling an ignorant comment what it is. it's unpleasant but it needs to be done. i am very happy, and did, listen to 
 objections/suggestions raised that from those who understand the context, by they disagreements on the specific issues i raised or the overall value in retaining the article. it seems funny that a discussion on the deletion proposal for such an article would attract untrained attention, whose only interest, apparently, is to ensure that some "policy" is followed, as they understand that policy, sensibly or otherwise. the discussion then becomes pointless. as the risk of being overly dramatic, it would be similarly ridiculous to have an amatuer sitting on the editorial board of, say, Phy. Lett. X (does it even go to X? )), and decides what gets in the journal. again at the risk of overdramatizing, this reminds of the story when the physicist Alan Sokal, as a prank, submitted some gibberish to a sociology(?) journal and got accepted. it would be funny to see whether one can duplicate that here, write up some garbage filled with technical jargon,  put it on AfD, and see whether it gets defended. 

 if that's the WP policy, so be it, but then one needs to be extra careful with actions which could bring un-knowledgable attention to articles, such as AfD.