Deletion of Dynamic Steady State Universe Theory

Comment: Ranzan's argument, linked by Uncle G, is that the theory was presented at a conference in 2002, and so the lapse of time means that it is no longer "original research"; but passing time alone is not enough, what is needed is evidence of independent discussion and comment on the theory. The relevant sentence from  is: "''If no reliable Wikipedia:Third-party sources|third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: per .  Non notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: I found one peer reviewed paper, which serves as a primary source, but could find no reliable secondary sources discussing the theory. As such, it falls below threshold for notability. I think this qualifies as a fringe theory of cosmology (see ), in that (1) it is an alternative to the big bang hypothesis and associated lambda CDM model that is the current mainstream theory these days and (2) it has few adherents
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: this article fails the |notability guidelines. The only non-primary coverage I could find myself was the non |reliable source Marmet (2013) {{diff|Dynamic_Steady_State_Universe_Theory|532948399|532944269|which I added to the article}}. The article is not |original unpublished research in the Wikipedia sense because, whilst all known sources are |primary sources (e.g. http://physicsessays.org/doi/abs/10.4006/1.3476412 DSSU ''Relativity —The Lorentz Transformations Applied to Aether-Space''. '''Physics Essays''' Vol '''23''', No.3, p&nbsp;520 (2010), the |original research policy does not prohibit such sources. The |policy actually states: ''Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them''. Incidentally, I wrote to {{user|Ranzan}} off-wiki via http://www.cellularuniverse.org/ cellularuniverse.org asking "Has the DSSU theory received any coverage (positive or negative) in any peer reviewed journal, book or news article by any authors other than Conrad Ranzan?". The reply did not contain any links to any such coverage other than http://www.CellularUniverse.org/SpRanzanProfile.htm/ Ranzan's own papers or web site. If I get a reply to my further request to Ranzan I may change my view
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE||WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:PRIMARY||WP:OR||WP:OR)