Okay one more voice I am an electrical engineer took a rather meaty course in Electromagnetic Machinery using the Fitzgerald Kingsley et al text that is used to back up a few of the claims in the article etc Having said that much of the article as is is not so unambiguously clear to the typical Wikipedia reader that such a reader should believe the claims without sources There are numerous parts of the article that seem to make extremely specific and often broad claims all without any source whatsoever I see no reason at all that this article should get a pass from the rather ordinary parts of WP V which is after all core Wikipedia policy and includes the idea that challenged material should be either sourced or it could reasonably be removed after some period of time Moreover the burden of presenting evidence for the claims is on the editor who wants the material to remain in Wikipedia If the material is challenged and then not sourced by someone who cares enough to do so within a few weeks or a couple of months then the material may reasonably be removed until such time as sources are found and the material is cited This doesn t seem that hard Cheers