Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Personality clone

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. Sandahl 21:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personality clone[edit]

Unreferenced, original research Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, cannot be verified in any reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 00:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OR Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 06:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Delete as original research -- Whpq (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete for now. Kudos to the author for continuing to work on the article, and I apologize for the community that your first talkpage message is a deletion notice and not a welcome message. I'll fix that next. Use the welcome message to link to helpful pages that could assist your writing, including how to properly cite an article. As it stands, the article still doesn't meet our criteria for inclusion. This discussion will be here for a few days, the best way to keep the article is to prove that the term personality clone is widespread (not just Dr. Doolittle), notable, and verifiable in third party sources that explain what it is, why it's important, and such. Keeper | 76 19:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In my opinion, the phrase "personality clone" does not really have any independent existence. It is merely one word modifying another, like "red book", and not a notable coining such as "red tide". As far as I can determine via Google, when the phrase is used, the writer tends to mean just what would be expected from the meanings of the individual words (and probably the phrase has been so used since the popularization of clone). The only unusual usage appears to belong to an item of computer software, Saberdata's "PC Personality Clone", but that is not the topic of this article. I sympathize with the author, and expect it will not be too hard to find numerous examples of the phrase in use, but suspect that it will be very difficult to show notability. Tim Ross·^talk 19:53, 22 December 2007 (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.