Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xylotechnigraphy


 * 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 speedy keep. Per speedy keep#1, the nominator fails to advance an argument for deletion or redirection and no one else recommends that the page be deleted. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Xylotechnigraphy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Daniel kenneth (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Daniel kenneth, you have not provided a deletion rationale. On what grounds are you nominating this for deletion? I believe the subject is sufficiently notable to have a brief article. Apart from its entry in the The Oxford Dictionary of Architecture, I have found a rather lengthy discussion of the process in The Architect (March 6, 1875) which can be used to expand it. Voceditenore (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2016 (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.