Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Figurenude


 * 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 as unsourced neologism. Sandstein (talk) 13:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Figurenude

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Protologism, minuscule number of Google hits, the referenced website figurenude.com is owned by the creator of this article Pseudomonas(talk) 03:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment. I've been working with the creator (and owner of the related website) to make him aware of Wikipedia policies; I won't take a position here, but just wanted to note that I've referred him over to Wiktionary and he seems agreeable to taking his protologism there.  Accounting4Taste: talk 03:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Is a neologism by its own admission (first paragraph) with no references. Falls under something that someone made up one day because the domain name was available.  Pharmboy (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Accounting, pending the transwiki process. --Blanchardb- Me MyEars MyMouth -timed 16:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought I was the first to use the term but was not nearly. I began using it around 1991. I did not use the internet then at all. You will find: figurenude Lisa's {fine art nude images}. figurenude.jpg by Lisa on 7/8/2001 There you will see an excellent image that IS a figurenude. Using the word extremely consistent with the definition. Olover Godby used the term to TAG this set of figurenudes around October 20, 2007 I used the term in court the first Wed after 7/9/2005 It may only be permanent in court records and to me, but that is OK. PLEASE let it remain...? If it must just go - I guess its OK. CurtisNeeley (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Group f/16. I thought co- signified two? I won't post anything else here and let it disappear. Perhaps it needs to go elsewhere? Hints? I just want to be a world famous photographer who is also mentally disabled, not just as a mentally disabled guy. Perhaps this could be a good citation for neologisms being common to a brain injury? I am looking into Wiktionary, but I think it really needs more background. CurtisNeeley (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * let it remain....  Notability..? It is a word that has been used for very many years.
 * Comment I don't think that MSN Groups passes muster as a source under WP:RS. Pharmboy (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Notability...? I personally used it online years ago.  I have a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and was once removed from a respirator with a "do not revive" order.  Terri Schiavo died without her feeding tube but mine was left in after the respirator was removed. See. I was a fairly well known photographer of the nude.  After being paralyzed, I have full use of only one arm. I still shoot fine art.  It might be a result of aphasia that I feel the word has already existed and only been used by a few other photographers.  All those on the site figurenude.com chose to have their fine art nudes presented on the site. Looking at Nude photography listing here you see several variations of how a nude photo is described.  I do not mind not being listed as its creator. I didn't create it. It has been around for decades among photographers.  I am unmistakably an expert at photography.  Ansel Adams co-founded Group f/64 and I co-founded
 * I think the main problem here is that there are no outside citations. Add citations from reliable sources (see WP:RS) such as major newspapers (not just art publications) using the word or covering the topic, then notability is no longer the issue.  As to being an expert, that really doesn't apply here.  You could be the Pope of Chili Town and it wouldn't change the fact that we can't find proper citations proving notability and you haven't provided any to boot.  Pharmboy (talk) 00:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * per your talk preferences... I tell you there are no outside citations 'yet'. There may never be outside of art publications. . CurtisNeeley (talk) 01:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * KEEP It is as 'notable' as nude photography w/disclaimers. CurtisNeeley (talk) 13:59, 19 December 2007 (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.