Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artweld


 * 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.  Singu larity  09:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Artweld

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article concerns a non-notable neologism coined by the article's creator; the article has no references other than the author's own web site. The article also serves to promote the author's commercial interests. KurtRaschke (talk) 14:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable neologism, advertising. J I P  | Talk 17:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per both. Johnbod (talk) 19:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.Modernist (talk) 00:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  freshacconci  speak to me  00:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - notability not established. Coverage in independent reliable sources not provided.  Frank  |  talk  03:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As I am perhaps a bit new in participating and in fully understanding 100% of all the specific requirements and entire criteria within "Wikipedia" ... I will gladly provide any and all necessary reference, evidence as well as additional substance that I'm sure will prove this page to be both worthy and necessary in sustaining it's listing ... and should also satisfy the recent few who have suggested and/or requested that "Artweld" be deleted.

I am now in the process of compiling a variety of actual past and present documentation including highly respected local and national "Printed Publications", Professional Trade Journals, and also a segment from a widely acclaimed documentary styled and formatted Television Show that will further support the validity of my request to keep this page active and alive ! Glen Mayo (talk) 16:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Your effort at contributing is appreciated and welcome. There are many, many articles that can use some help. However, Wikipedia is not (among other things) a place for original research. Everything contained here is to be referenced from independent, reliable sources, not primary sources (such as self-published material). If this term / process / artistic method receives coverage (journals, newspapers, books) then it would be appropriate to have an article about it. Your efforts would be welcome in any of the (literally) millions of existing articles, or, if independent coverage of this subject exists, adding it to this article. Frank  |  talk  03:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: Non-notable neologism.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 12:41, 27 May 2008 (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.