Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3D Blindness


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Mojo Hand (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

3D Blindness

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no clear topic here. The citations which available online, including Hinton's 1979 article, do not use the term 3D Blindness, and I cannot find anything else that does. PROD was already declined by the article's creator, who appears to be one of two presenters of a one-day session at SIGGRAPH 2001, presumably including Hinton's tests as described in the Wikipedia page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 22.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 15:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I would have had some sympathy for an article about how some people do not have good binocular vision and cannot appreciate 3d TV and other 3D visual presentations, but this article is about some tests Hinton devised which find that 96 percent of the population is 3D blind. Seems silly as well as being non-notable. Edison (talk) 02:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not enough RS coverage for GNG. I found no mentions in books, and just a couple articles on CAD (1 2) that mentioned this in passing. this web page suggests the term originated with a Bob Parsblow in 1982; he's an author of the cited 2001 siggraph reference. I agree with Edison that the naming is silly, which of course is not a reason for deletion, but it is also non-notable, at least as named. The difficulty humans have visualizing things in 3d is certainly noted in literature, but it's more commonly referred to as difficulty visualizing things in 3D, not "3D blindness". The term "3d blindness" turns up in quite a few sources in reference to an inability to see things in 3D, as with a visual impairment inhibiting stereoscopic vision, but that's different than this article's topic. Agyle (talk) 12:45, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Not enough sources for this meaning of 3D blindness. Also, though I know it's not our place to criticize research, it's not at all clear that people use "3D vision" to answer the questions, rather than logic. I know I use logic. Dingo1729 (talk) 19:53, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.