Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michele Merkin ASCII art

Add links
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 was delete. — Aitias // discussion 00:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michele Merkin ASCII art[edit]

Michele Merkin ASCII art (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is an ascii art image of Michelle Merkin, rather than an encyclopedia article. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, it is, but I found it to be the only way of presenting it in a proper way. Iceblock (talk) 14:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why do you think that it had to be presented at all? Wikipedia already has picture formats that can illustrate articles in colour, and with high resolution. It has no need of picture formats that do neither. File:Michele Merkin 1.jpg already exists, without need for any conversion such as this to a practically useless, and certainly not helpful to readers, alternative format. Uncle G (talk) 14:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as spam. Why was it not marked for speedy? Jofakēt (talk) 14:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It isn't, unless you're Michelle Merkin... Peridon (talk) 21:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it's NOT an article, and Wikipedia is NOT an art gallery. Perhaps delete by WP:SNOW ?Wuhwuzdat (talk) 14:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • It cannot be put at Commons as they don't accept TXT files. Iceblock (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; possible speedy G3. Deor (talk) 14:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • In what other way could this be presented? Iceblock (talk) 15:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Go to ASCII art where you have already edited. Look at the numerous examples presented there. Edward321 (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • It deserves to be its own "article"; the examples presented are simple, or picture files of ASCII art Iceblock (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not an article at all. Edward321 (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not an article, but why delete it because of that? Iceblock (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not encyclopedic. Would be fine as a website, *.nfo file or even a dos/historic site, but wikipedia is not the proper venue. — Ched (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Where else in Wikimedia's projects? Iceblock (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete firstly Wikipedia doesn't use editors' ASCII art to represent people, we use photographs or significant artistic representations, secondly if something is in the article namespace it should be an article, redirect, list or disambigation page, and this isn't. This page is unencyclopedic and should be deleted. Hut 8.5 16:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is a featured picture, but I didn't find a way to present it as a derivative work of only one file. It can be found at File:Michele Merkin 1.jpg Iceblock (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why did you add the ASCII art then? The jpg version will be much better in the article. Wikipedia isn't a web host. Hut 8.5 16:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ched also says it is unencyclopedic. Iceblock (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • So what? I agree with them. Hut 8.5 16:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - WP:NOT the National Gallery DitzyNizzy (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not trying to flog a dead horse, but this is not an article and it is not encyclopaedic. (I'm not even sure it's art.) I don't know where it should go--that's not my job. And about "not an article," encyclopaedias contain articles, not other things. Drmies (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Encyclopedias contain articles, that's right. But in this case, all the characters make up the picture, and they cay be copied and pasted into another document. It is a supplement to the article about ASCII art – I believe we should move it to a subpage of ASCII art when this discussion is closed. Iceblock (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not a supplement to anything. It's a simple conversion of a picture that we already have, in a useful format, into a format that isn't useful to readers at all. Uncle G (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete. It's snowing and there's no point dragging this out.--S Marshall Talk/Cont 19:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Why move it when it should (and looks like will) be deleted? It's not an article and serves no purpose. Not an article, no indication as to why it should be on Wikipedia, etc. I would have tagged it for speedy deletion instead of bringing it here. TJ Spyke 20:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The article under discussion has been moved to ASCII art/Michele Merkin ASCII art. It should still, obviously, be deleted (along with the newly-created redirects). siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 22:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment transkwiki to WikiSource? Dunno, do they take these? 76.66.196.229 (talk) 04:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why is this ASCII art not using ASCII? What is it, Unicode art? 76.66.196.229 (talk) 04:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ℓ°ℓ! An excellent point that I totally missed. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I chose the oldest name. Iceblock (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True. Iceblock (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikisource only takes source text that has previously been published elsewhere, not editors' ASCII art. Hut 8.5 07:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • DitzyNizzy: I have a comment and a hint to you; please scroll up and read them :-) Iceblock (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Very clever, I suppose, if you like that sort of thing. Not encyclopaedic. Peridon (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete absolutely no value, as an encyclopedia article, as ASCII art, or anything. Nuke it from orbit. JuJube (talk) 00:53, 2 February 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michele_Merkin_ASCII_art&oldid=1138079154"