Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikitography

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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 05:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitography

Self-referential protologism. Not worth moving to Wikipedia: -- RHaworth 19:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Sure people take pictures for WP but this isn't yet a full-blown movement requiring a portmanteau like Wikistress. Ruby 19:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. - Latinus 19:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ASR. Stifle 00:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Google does not turn up the term except in reference to the [Wikitography] web site, a Wiki about photography which I operate, and which at least at this point does not warrant a Wikipedia article yet either. --Clubjuggle 18:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as worthless protologism. incog 18:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article was intended to encourage anyone with a digital camera to help build an aspect of Wikipedia that is lacking. The origional author as well as myself feel that if more people copyleft photography, or realease it directly to public domain, that Wikipedia articles will be improved by the addition of pictures. Linuxdan 01:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although it should be reclassified as 'slang.' The google argument is sound, but I've heard the term used as slang, hence my position. Narphlan 05:31, 27 January 2006 (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.