Deletion of Abhas Mitra

Comment: I would argue that it is a significant concept in the field of astrophysics because it proposes an alternative to black holes.  This is significant just as alternative theories for the big bang are significant.  Until someone can come out and prove one way or another that one theory is ''absolutely'' correct, any plausible hypothesis (which MECO certainly is) deserves to be debated.  Combine this rationale with the numerous articles published on the subject (found on the MECO page, some of which review Mitra's work) and we are left with a clear candidate for crit 5 of rof
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: The issue is the notability of Dr. Mitra, not the notablity of the Magnetospheric eternally collapsing object|MECO theory.'''  First of all, the MECO theory is not extraordinary, but instead is one of many theories that seek to explain how general relativity really does not permit black holes to exist.  I personally have reason to believe that all such theories are mistaken, but will not contest the MECO as an encyclopedic subject due to the attention that it has garnered.  My issue instead is one of whether Dr. Mitra is automatically becomes encyclopedic because he has contributed to the MECO concept.  I really fail to see that.  Instead I see an article about a relatively minor scientist that is very unlikely to ever be more than a stub.  Even now it says little more than that Dr. Mitra is a contributor to the MECO concept, somcething that can already be inferred from the MECO article.  Please recall that |Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collector of information
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)