Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disingenuous Twaddle

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, technically requested by an original author; but I have taken the liberty of moving the page to User:Liouxsie/Disingenuous Twaddle in case it should ever get the sort of needed coverage to become notable, or just because it's an editor's personal project and interest. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 19:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disingenuous Twaddle

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

Not notable in the slightest.

Delete. Note that this is about an experimental language and art magazine... created in 2010... Lord knows, it does seem that we are awash in disengenuous twaddle at times, but this article is not about that. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.Methinks the creators are also removing the delete tags from the article itself. Sigh.... 86.2.118.52 (talk) 15:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Camuscando (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a vote, it's a discussion of reasons to keep or delete, so you need to explain why -- Boing! said Zebedee 18:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if the page is inappropriate, but reserve a space for when it is. Liouxsie (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notablity not established by coverage in other publications, but if it is then recreate article. Kitfoxxe (talk) 18:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ if the page is inappropriate, but reserve a space for when it is. Liouxsie (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noted; I indented and struck your second Delete comment; since this isn't a vote, one such comment is sufficient. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I would hope that it followed in the footsteps of L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E rather than in the vein. Still, a monthly paper copy - gives them two issues. Hardly enough for notability. Especially as there appears to be no content yet. I quote from 21 Feb 2010: "The really good stuff will go up on this blog, the really, REALLY good stuff will be published in the first issue of a soon-to-be-regular zine! Made out of real paper!" I've been through the site and can find no more than begging for stuff to be sent. Sorry, guys. When you get some actual stuff to show, or fix the page so people can find the content - it might be just me that's missing great quantities of twaddle - and can reference it other than from a blog, forum, etc, then come back. Till then, remember - Wikipedia is not for promotion. Good luck with it, anyway. I might send you something - but not as Peridon (talk) 18:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above. I agree that an article may become appropriate if the publication eventually becomes notable; as it stands, though, the article is premature. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before this gets unnecessarily lengthy: all comments appreciated, both constructive and negative. It was a shameless (though harmless) act of self-publicity and I apologise. Can't blame us - someone needs to be there to enjoy the material when it goes up (it's for our peers' benefit, and if they achieve even a little recognition, it's a worthwhile venture - this isn't begging for personal gain). Whoever is able to delete the thing, please go ahead and kill it before our tender spirits are well and truly obliterated. The creator, Liouxsie (talk) 19:22, 25 February 2010 (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.