Deletion of Schrödinger's cat in popular culture (2nd nomination)

Comment: as a violation of . None of the sources are ''about'' the article subject; they are ''examples'' of the article subject as per the personal judgment of Wikipedia editors, which is original research via synthesis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: Mostly unsourced list of . Much of this is simply not notable. Some of this material could pass some criterium of inclusion to WP, and could perhaps be added to the main article, but the subject is not notable enough for its own article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA)

Comment: obviously |notable popular culture concept from the |vast number and |reliability of sources.  ''Agreed'' that it needs extensive trimming
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: to Schrodinger's Cat. Yes, it's important to note the physics thought experiment has penetrated the pop culture, but there's a good amount of  going on here - even if sourced. EG: just name-dropping Schrodinger is not a significant factor, though the fact it has been name-dropped is important, and about 50% of this list can be turned into a statement that "Schrodinger is often used as a name for a cat or other aspect in reference to the physics thought experiment" and that "Many popular culture works use the "Schrodinger's Cat" idea to gloss over the theory of quantum mechanics to the general reader."  However, listing each and every name-drop of SC is just not discriminate
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Unless sources can be adduced that specifically and substantively treat the article's topic (the uses of Schrödinger's cat in popular culture), this is |original research synthesized from primary sources. The only sources currently referenced in the article (aside from Schrödinger's own words) are a TV-show script and a bunch of Web comics that refer to the cat-in-a-box; none of them (including the Schrödinger source) establish the notability of, or discuss in any way, the article's topic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: as cruft-laden, |IPC trivia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA)