Deletion of Dynamic theory of gravity

Comment: Like Pjacobi, I have to wonder if the keep opinions actually read the article. The nomination covers the two main problems,  and .  would be equally relevant.  covers this in a single serving of alphabet soup
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR||WP:V||WP:SOAP||WP:BOLLOCKS)

Comment: While I approve of doing a redirect, I do not think that  applies here.  Tesla did announce this, and it did create a stir in the press.  That the theory itself (if it existed) was bollocks is another issue.   The issue is rather one of whether this supposed theory is |notable enough to merit its own article, instead of only being mentioned in the Nikola Tesla article.  As I indicated above, I do not see that it is
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Complete bollocks (WP:BOLLOCKS||WP:N)

Comment: and redirect the article name.  topic for which there is not enough  material to write an |attributable article on the topic. Thus, the  topic does not meet Wikipedia |notability guidelines and cannot meet Wikipedia Wikipedia:List_of_policies#Content_and_Style|article policy standards
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:RS||WP:A||WP:FRINGE||WP:N)