Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ubiquitous gaze

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. If anyone wants to contest this deletion please post on my talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:50, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ubiquitous gaze[edit]

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

Unreferenced. Very stubby, has about 2 bits of information, and should quite easily be worked into the Trompe-l'œil article (which I would've done but as an outsider I don't feel i can do this appropriately). Don't know what notability criteria this would be assessed against, but would've thought if it was a sufficiently important aspect of art, there'd be lots written about it. Rayman60 (talk) 19:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 20:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:57, 6 December 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.