Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual writing


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 03:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Visual writing

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

OR. "Visual writing" is a neologism at best; and even as a neologism, that term is not a term that is used to describe the topic of the article. The references don't use the term "visual writing". The article's haphazard definition of "visual writing" would also encompass childrens' picture books, for example. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as defintion. Plus the WP:OR, issue with the sources, &c. --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 21:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SYNTH Polarpanda (talk) 21:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a neologism (though not a dictdef), as well as per the absence of sources. --Glenfarclas (talk) 22:55, 17 December 2009 (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.