Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creek Sculpting

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. —fetch ·comms 00:49, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creek Sculpting[edit]

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

Notability not proven, appears to be primarily original research. Perhaps it can be redirected to Land Art, but there doesn't appear to be anything about this per se. JNW (talk) 01:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Talk-page comment from article author says:
There aren't going to be really any resources for this article. I understand that it makes it more difficult to verify but this article was created mainly for ease of explanation.

That's a clear WP:V failure--article's hopeless no matter how well-intentioned it was. If there's no WP:RS about it, then there isn't even any viable content to merge. DMacks (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Neologism, with the article fortified with gibberish: Besides art, Creek Sculpting can be used for other purposes as well.* * * Creek Sculpting can be used both literally and metaphorically to teach one about Physics, Geometry, Engineering, Architecture, Trigonometry, Algebra, Basic Mathematics such as Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication, and Division and more. Ummmmmm, right. Carrite (talk) 01:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmmmm, would you dismiss fluidics as well if someone said it both literally and metaphorically could teach one about logic and electronics?? Neologism, verifiable, gibberish, not so much... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluidics —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.21.48.36 (talk) 03:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- ℳono 03:01, 12 August 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.