Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CETI Patterson Power Cell (2nd nomination)
I finished checking source 8 when I figured that the rest were just as poor quality and gave up.  Websites like the New Energy times are not enough to establish notability outside of a small fringe circle.  CETI is specific is mentioned recently in passing but not substantially outside of fringe publications, including their press releases.  Furthermore, WP does  exist to host "the next big thing," we create articles ''after'' something becomes big.  If this device truly does what it says it does, then it will be featured in every science journal in the world soon enough, and when it is we will have an article on it. If it doesn't (and it's been 15 years), then it was just a minor blip in the history of impossible perpetual motion machines and nothing to write home about. Looks like the article sourcing has been cleaned up a bit.  I'm still not convinced that it's notable but I'm on the fence that it isn't
— User:Noformation, 08:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOT (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)