Deletion of Higgs boson in fiction

Comment: unlike some commenters, I don’t mind the existence of an article with this name, but as it stands this seems like a  candidate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: Pure , and almost all the mentioned media simply use "Higgs boson" as pure technobabble rather than hard science or science fiction
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Listcruft (WP:LISTCRUFT)

Comment: based on  policy, and also and , which says a list article is {{tq|considered notable is if it has been discussed ''as a group or set'' by independent reliable sources}}. My own search for RS found only derivatives of this WP article. Without |secondary, reliable sources, the premise of this article is entirely original research. (Also, a search of article histories shows this article had its origins in the Higgs boson article, but was removed 22 Mar 2005, then became a subject of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Higgs_boson&oldid=75681287#Merger a merge discussion which apparently failed.) Cheers
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR||WP:LISTN||WP:RS)