Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Six-hour novel


 * 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 delete. --Ezeu 04:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Six-hour novel
Completely idiosyncratic non-topic. Shoehorn 08:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DarthVad e r 08:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as completely rubbish vanity. The "author" mentioned links to a User page, and it's essentially self-serving made up guff. I like how James Joyce was supposedly an "unintentional" proponent of something made up sixty-five years after he died. Non-notable neologisms are bad enough, but ones masquerading as a serious literary genre, as an English graduate, make me cry. Seb Patrick 09:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and possible WP:NOR. Surely it depends on your font size? "A six-hour novel may also cover ten hours"? I think I can see where this theory starts breaking down... --DaveG12345 09:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete original research - author's own opinion, unreferenced theory.  (aeropagitica)    (talk)   10:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Fabricated from wholecloth. 7 Google hits, two from wikipedia. I'm taking the link to this out of Literary technique right now. -- N  scheffey (T/C) 13:42, 27 June 2006 (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.