Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viper vision
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 of the debate was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7, only actual contributor has requested its deletion. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Original research and advertisement for someone's brilliant invention; possibly also copyvio. Deleted via WP:PROD once already and now recreated, which means we get to shoot it down via WP:AFD again. Sandstein 04:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - original research/advertising --MarsRover 04:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete "Viper vision" + stapleton only gets about 21 G hits. According to this article, it's just a patent and theory at this point. If the article survives afd, it needs a massive cleanup. OhNoitsJamieTalk 05:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. advertisement JohnM4402 06:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per Ohnoitsjamie. — TheKMantalk 07:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Do not delete. True, there maybe copyright for Viper Vision Inc. or vipervision.com and other uses of the term clearly different from this biomimicry of real pit vipers IR vision. The referenced article by newscientist.com was false and clearly in contradiction to the patent application it links to and published by the USPTO, not by the inventor. Obviously other deletes are intended to link to advertisement for deleter. Constructive criticism and collaboration is welcomed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StapleVision (talk • contribs)
- Delete, advertisement. Docether 13:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, original research, advertisement. --Terence Ong 14:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Contributors to this discussion may find the arguments made by the author of the article at User talk:StapleVision of (very mild) interest. Sandstein 18:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, original research, advertisement.MichaelMaggs 21:31, 31 May 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.