Deletion of M/z misconception

Comment: per LukasPietsch, offends against 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: Kehrli: Nobody disputes that m/q is more correct than the way more common m/z. But this is not the place to promote your personal opinion that only m/q should be used - this is an encyclopedia. Please see  for the way how we handle such issues here at Wikipedia. Please stop replacing m/z by m/q, instead write a neutral and short paragraph why m/q is more correct. I don't see a way to keep this biased article, especially under this title and I doubt that the topic deserves more than a short paragraph. (Please sign your contributions here by appending
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Units are chosen popularly, not by the book, which is why the United States still uses Standard for carpentry and construction. Also,  and an ArbCom decision from last year say that whenever two different styles are appropriate (think of the serial comma) that making articles internally consistent correct but attempting to "correct" other articles is wrong
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:MOS)

Comment: , , 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:OR)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)