Deletion of Lagrangian-Eulerian Advection

Comment: I believe the nominator's point is that this is a brief description of a highly technical subject matter, questioning its relevance and worthiness to a general, everyman encyclopedia.  I think we're well within the scope of  #7 here, "scientific journals and research papers", along with #JARGON
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOT)

Comment: Per  2e "''nominations which are so erroneous that they indicate that the nominator has not even read the article in question''". This is because the nomination says that no sources were found when the article already contains a source. That is cited elsewhere as you can readily see by checking the search links to books and scholarly papers above. The nominator seems to have made this nomination as part of a spree in which the facts of each case are not being checked
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Speedy keep (WP:SK)

Comment: and  to the nom. Bad-faith nomination, with dozens of reliable book and journal sources existing. -- Special:Contributions/202.124.74.22|202.124.74.22
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Whacking with a wet trout (WP:TROUT)

Comment: spaced ndash}} Per  and an apparent lack of considering section D of . These sources took only moments to locate
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE||WP:BEFORE)