Deletion of Quantum realism

Comment: As a general rule you don't have to be a subject specialist to take part in a discussion about an article. As it happens I read mathematics alongside my Philosophy degree, my wife has a science degree, my daughter is at Cambridge taking a science degree, my father in law is a scientist, some of my friends are scientists and I work in a science-oriented industry. But that's not my basis for objecting to the article, ''it's simple rules like  and  that apply across the board to '''all''' articles''. As for being fringe, well the article says that the subject is "unconventional", "requires... attention" and has "developmental issues" but  says in no uncertain terms that "While currently accepted scientific paradigms may later be rejected, and hypotheses previously held to be controversial or incorrect sometimes become accepted by the scientific community (such as plate tectonics), it is not the place of Wikipedia to venture such projections. If the status of a given idea changes, then Wikipedia changes to reflect that change. Wikipedia primarily focuses on the state of knowledge today." The status of this particular idea today is that it is largely ignored and not fully developed (i.e. half-baked
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:FRINGE)