Deletion of Fluid entropy

Comment: First of all, when "fluid entropy" is typed into Google, this article appears at the top of the heap.  Which this is not too unusual for Wikipedia articles, it normally does not happen with new Wikipedia articles unless little else exists on the topic.  So immediately we have evidence on non-notability in the Google search.  Furthermore, examination of the other Google hits found shows that the term "fluid entropy" is used in the context "the entropy of a fluid", which makes this term quite trival.  To make matters worse, the article offers no mathematical definition of this "fluid entropy", which is not in accord with the other existing entropy articles.   Overall, this is a rambling article which does not add anything useful to this encyclopedia. As a description this term is trivial and non-notable.  As a field of study it is a neologism and therefore inadmissible under 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: I know that credentials don't count for much, but I am a recently graduated chemistry major, so I know a little about entropy and thermodynamics.  This article makes no sense to me.  Entropy, fundamentally, has nothing to do with bosons and fermions, but rather with the work losses of the Carnot engine and the equilibrating pattern of the Boltzmann distribution.  At best, this article is |original research; at worst, it's just wrong.  I'm completely on board with Dan Gluck's opinion, and I'm unimpressed by the author's desperate attempt to rescue this article using sock puppets
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)