Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radial balance

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 speedy delete per WP:G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement of content here. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Radial balance[edit]

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

Was deprodded without rationale or improvement. Uncited article which is simply a definition. Delete as per WP:NOTDIC. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:24, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Definitely falls under WP:NOTDIC. A google search indicates that the word is being used out there in the design world, and there are blogs and Prezis discussing it. However, per WP:NEO, there are no actual sources that I can find beyond the blogs. Since there's not much there and no sources, best to delete and someone can create this in a few years if it begins to appear in reliable sources. freshacconci (✉) 20:07, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deleteas WP:G12 Copyvio from. http://www.digitalphotographytipsonline.com/balance-in-photography.html Mduvekot (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:16, 26 March 2017 (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.