Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conversational Photography

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conversational Photography

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Essay on a non-notable neologism. Sammy1339 (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable, confusing subject. Also, the creator was notified of a speedy deletion of an article with the same title, at 21:08, 9 June 2015 (2 days ago), and, creator has same username as article title, so possibly a COI. Seagull123 (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, explaining what we already know in a language nobody understands; non-notable / obviously made up by creator. Blackguard 23:07, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I was going to make my motion by means of a photograph, but then I realized that it would be better with a rebus, which I will call an "new paradigm graphemoji." Trademark and money, please. Delete for OR and probably promotion. Hithladaeus (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:32, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:32, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as an article about a humdrum neologism, as one about an unclear subject, as one promoting a website, or as some combination thereof. -- Hoary (talk) 09:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.