Deletion of Base load theory

Comment: This is a very notable subject that is widely discussed. The nominator only gives reasons for editing, not deletion. How can you say "nothing appears worth salvaging" when the article contains loads of well sourced factual information about the subject. The only problem is with the way some of it is presented. And the article's purpose is ''not'' to counter any claims. That may have been the purpose of the original creator, but that editor does not |own the article so does not have the right to define its purpose. As with any Wikipedia article this one's purpose is to present |neutral, |verifiable information on a |notable subject. That purpose can't be fulfilled by deleting the article, only by editing it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ownership of content (WP:OWN||WP:NPOV||WP:V||WP:N)

Comment: I can find no evidence to substantiate this article's |notability. The reference list, while on the surface credible, doesn't really address the topic. (The vast majority don't even mention Base Load Theory.) At best it's |OR and a |synthesis. Base Load Theory fails the Google Test with only 9 hits. Although the Google test isn't perfect, it does suggest a ''prima facie'' case against notability unless an alternative explanation can be provided such as inherent notability, predates the internet, specialised topic, etc. none of which apply in this case as far as I can see
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:OR||WP:SYN)