Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy Catalyzer
Speedy Keep''' -- And why did somebody think they could get away with a simple PROD?  If you read the talk page, this has been a very contentious article, so I would argue that the deletion request is being made strictly on the ground of being disruptive to the article and certainly not being cooperative.  It clearly has multiple sources in terms of basic notability.  That the detailed explanation of this concept may be very thin on those sources is true, but this is not the appropriate forum to be discussing which sources may be reliable or not other than to discuss basic notability and its qualifications for being included on Wikipedia.  It has received coverage on CNN, Forbes, and other "mainstream" news media outlets to at least confirm notability of the concept as deserving to be discussed on Wikipedia.  It may be a scam, but then again scams certainly are worthy of being written about on Wikipedia as well.  This article deserves some attention by some admins as there has been situations of , and edit warring on a massive scale where some editors simply can't get anything contributed at all.  The original rationale for deletion was simply boneheaded at least for why this article should be deleted and the rest of the article issues can certainly be dealt with elsewhere.  At least use reasonable grounds for why it should be deleted other than "it is a scam
— User:Robert, 22:19, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OWN (Wikipedia:Ownership of content)