Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elliptical poetry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Elliptical poetry

Elliptical poetry (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable term, little independent coverage. Note: I created this article. Formulafiftypoet 17:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NEO. VanTucky (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NEO. Also contains WP:OR. Should be speedy delete, as author/nominator requests deletion. {{db-author}}. --Evb-wiki 18:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, term seems to be accepted and understood in the appropriate circles (e.g. mention in Poetry Magazine). --Eyrian 18:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, seems meaningful within the field. Perhaps it could be merged somewhere, but I'd hate to see us lose useful, verifiable content. Friday (talk) 18:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: Formulafiftypoet (talk · contribs) has been filing a whole mess of AfD's recently and has been accused of WP:POINT. Morgan Wick 18:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • keep is noteable. FormulaP, please don't despair and delete your work, which is admirable.Merkinsmum 19:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep despite the WP:POINT nomination. NawlinWiki 20:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree with User: Eyrian ("term seems to be accepted and understood in the appropriate circles)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Onceonthisisland (talk • contribs)
  • Keep per others - needs to be formatted to give refs a separate section. Shalom Hello 21:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Response Reference section complete. Spazure 09:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep, notable term per the field. User has been repeatedly accused of WP:POINT, so I doubt the validity of this nom. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 00:07, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, and from what I can tell the nom knows better. --Dhartung | Talk 08:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I appreciate the author/nominator's honesty. I still don't know anything about elliptical poetry after reading this article. Mandsford 23:20, 22 July 2007 (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.