The given page title was invalid or had an inter-language or inter-wiki prefix.
It may contain one or more characters which cannot be used in titles.
- View log • ) – (
- (Find sources: )
Written like a textbook, hopeless case for re-write, blow it up start again. Article is too specific and technical to be useful, written about a specific experiment, could possibly be reduced and merged into the Entanglement article. Despayre tête-à-tête 14:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Merge some content to Entanglement-assisted classical capacity which seems the most relevant article. Appears too specific for a stand-alone article. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Promotion of a paper with only 7 cites on GS. Too early. When it has 700 cites we can take another look. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC).
- Delete Too narrow a topic for an encyclopedia entry, no inline citations, few sources, and waaaaaaaay too long. Famousdog 08:24, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
| This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Articles for deletion/One-Shot Entanglement-Enhanced Classical Communication (2nd nomination), that was deleted or is being discussed for deletion, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.