Deletion of Worldwide energy supply (3rd nomination)

Comment: per . Wikipedia is not a host for academic papers
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: The content stinks.  The ''article'' "Worldwide energy supply" is certainly notable and is different from "World energy consumption" (one is supply, the other is demand).  The ''content'' may have  violations.  If so, that is an ''editing'' issue and not a ''deletion'' issue.  This article is on its third AFD now:No Consensus, then Keep.  I see no new deletion arguments introduced.  That the article is written by an academic is not a reason to delete.  That the article reads like a novel is not a reason to delete.  And I don't really like the colors in the graphs--but that isn't a reason to delete either.  Sometimes an article is so poorly written that we are better off deleting the article, but that isn't hte case here.  These are ''editing'' issues and not ''deletion'' issues
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)