Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pointillé


 * 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 of the debate was keep. –  Rob e  rt  01:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Pointillé
Dictdef. I've transwiki'd it already.
 * Delete as per my nom. Keep the rewrite and thanks to Stephen Deken.   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  02:56, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep with 253,000 google hits its gotta be a bit more than just a dic def. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy  Darwikinian Eventualist 15:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's certainly possible to write an article on the topic, but what we have at present is a one-sentence dictdef. If someone expands it to an article I'm very happy to withdraw the Afd. Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  17:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * We don't delete things where they haven't been expanded from (sub)stubs. We delete things where it is not possible to expand them from (sub)stubs.  There appears to be potential for expansion here.  Keep. Uncle G 20:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. A stub that begins with basic information.  Smerdis of Tlön 17:55, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Widely used technique, at one time.  Article begins like as a def, grows later -Meegs 19:04, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I would vote to keep a decent stub given the significance. At the moment, however, it could be speedy deleted as a short article without context. Capitalistroadster 20:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've expanded the stub to show that it is a general art form and given it more context of historical artistic significance. --Stephen Deken 21:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Revise - it needs to be expanded... and the stub needs to be replaced as pointillé is artwork, not literature. 147.70.242.21 22:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I replaced the stub notice with .  There doesn't seem to be a good category for this either -- "Art genres" and "Art materials" come close, but not quite. --Stephen Deken 00:26, 3 December 2005 (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.