Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alphabet Synthesis Machine: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Fix Linter errors. |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result of the debate was '''NO CONSENSUS'''. (Thought I'd write "delete", didn't you?) — [[User:JIP|<span style="color:#CC0000;">J</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">I</span><span style="color:#0000CC;">P</span>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 16:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
===[[Alphabet Synthesis Machine]]===
I'm not sure this is encyclopedic enough for Wikipedia. So I'm putting it up for the AfD test. [[User:Karol Langner|Karol]] 11:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Legitimately notable. Covered by PBS and appears to have attracted legitimate attention among typography periodicals. Over 12,000 Google hits. The first hundred looked quite serious. [[User:Durova|Durova]] 11:51, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I don't know it, but it sure looks good. [[User:Nazgjunk|Nazgjunk]] - - <small>[[Wikipedia:Sign_your_posts_on_talk_pages|Signing]] is</small> <sup>for [[User_talk:Nazgjunk|Whimps]]</sup> 14:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' A work in nascence. Could be interesting; come back when analysis is complete. [[User:Denni|D]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<
*Are you sure you checked this out? It doesn't aim to analyze anything. It's an interactive work of art that creates generates fictional alphabet scripts. Runs quite well, which is why PBS covers it. [[User:Durova|Durova]] 09:50, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. The only reason it was covered by PBS is that it was ''commissioned'' by PBS - it says so right at the top of the website, "An interactive online artwork '''created for''' Art21 and '''PBS'''". So I really don't think we can use the PBS references as evidence of media attention. I can't find any others, though - could you identify these typography periodicals you think have given it legitimate attention, please, [[User:Durova|Durova]]?<p>As for Google - most of the mentions on Google appear to be passing comments on blogs... — [[User:Haeleth|Haeleth]] <small>[[User_talk:Haeleth|Talk]]</small> 21:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)</p>
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
| |||