"

Reply to your comments on my talk page
Your uncivil tone notwithstanding, I love being proved wrong, so please take this to Wikipedia:Deletion review.  IF you have a problem with my resolution, please submit to the appropriate forum on Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard.

Regarding my decision: the concepts you were trying to present exist in the book's article; greater expounding does not, in my good faith search, exist in any documented form that conforms to our expectations, such as found at WP:V and WP:RS.  Again, if you disagree, I encourage you to use the forums/ outlets available to you.  My closure was a non-admin closure. -  talk 

Bollocks. That was an administrative action. That this is verifiable is admitted by you redirecting it to an article about a book covering it.- () Wolfkeeper (Talk) 

Deletion is administrative. Redirection is not inherently so and is most often executed by non-administrators.  That book, poorly referenced itself as being notable enough for inclusion, is barely enough to address such an obscure presentation.  100,000% greater clarity is required to make any sense of the topic as it is. -  talk 

No, I just checked. The policy clearly says you can't comment and close it even if you're not using admin priviledges.- () Wolfkeeper (Talk) 

I repeat, who the hell do you think you are?- () Wolfkeeper (Talk) "