Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold Aspden
What matters not is whether his debunking of scientific theories is "accepted wisdom", after all, the earth was held to be Flat Earth|flat unti somebody came along and proved otherwise. Einstein's theories are only theories, and even this great man could have got some of his calculations wrong. What concerns me is whether he fulfills . I am totally unimpressed by the arguments advanced by principal author of Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Harold Aspden|redacted to talk, which make it sound like some sort of conspiracy theory aginst the subject. Aspden's http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Harold+Aspden%22&hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&start=340&sa=N 333  unique Ghits are a pretty mixed bag, but among those are a number of wiki mirrors, book links, many blogs forum and personal website hits, but also a number of sites where he is directly involved in creating content; the other relevant hits indicates that he may indeed on the esoteric fringes of science, and may be below borderline notability. His book appear to languish in the http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/104-3715185-8166324?%5Fencoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=Harold%20Aspden upper two-millionsths per Amazon (with none appearing above 2.318 millionsths. However, 'Physics without Einstein' is kept in http://worldcat.org/oclc/61810&tab=holdings?loc=UK#tabs 13 UK libraries (not many universities amongst these), and http://worldcat.org/oclc/61810&tab=holdings&loc=USA&start_holding=21#tabs 92 (mostly university) libraries in the US, so it would appear not to be completely non-notable
— User:Ohconfucius, 23:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Notability)