Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polonol
My Prod2 was hastily written, and while I stick by my ''scientific'' reasoning (even if it exists, Not even wrong|it can't be proven by current technology), it did not make sense ''as a reason to delete''. The real issue is per nom: if we can't verify something by |significant coverage in several reliable sources, it ought to be deleted. Thank you all for your patience and forbearance in my lack of clarity
— User:Bearian, 16:43, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SIGCOV (Wikipedia:Notability)