Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diagrammatology


 * 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   no consensus. slakr \ talk / 23:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Diagrammatology

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has been speedily deleted once, and proposed for deletion. It violates WP:DICTIONARY and am only moving it to AfD because the creator keeps deleting the PROD tag. It should be moved to Wikitionary. cyberdog 958 Talk 05:32, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Given the number of books and articles on the topic, I would think a decent article could be built out of this. I don't have the time, knowledge or access to the source materials to do so, but if properly expanded from a DICTDEF to a usable stub, this article might spur someone to flesh it out.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:14, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve. There seem to be sufficient sources to make a real article. --Jakob (talk) (my editor review) 12:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with nom. This violates WP:Dictionary. It should move off to Wikitionary. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep AfD is for notability, not content. Take it to AfI or something. &there4; ZX95 [ discuss ] 01:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Going by the references, this article is mixing together several distinct subjects, most of which already have articles (e.g. Mathematical diagram). -- 101.117.30.160 (talk) 21:35, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 16:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - The article is clearly a stub. However, the subject appears to be more related to philosophy of mathematical thought than it is about the actual pragmatics of using diagrams.  Therefore, as long as an article can be developed, there appears to be something worth discussing in this topic.  Nickmalik (talk) 07:38, 2 June 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.