Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visualistics


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 02:27, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Visualistics

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable neologism. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Just wow. The first line of the article says what the word is "supposed to mean".  Bad form aside, nom is correct in the term being something someone made up recently and isn't notable, common or much of anything else at this point.  Dennis Brown (talk) 01:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BALL, Dennis Brown and nom. &mdash; Abhishek Talk to me 02:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * This is a poorly written unreferenced article on a non-notable neologism. We need not have it. Lady  of  Shalott  16:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * NOTICE - see Articles for deletion/Medical Visualistics. I also just restored all the AfD and other notices, which the s.p.a. author had removed. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)-- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  20:16, 7 April 2011 (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.