Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Word Superiority Effect

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 02:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Word Superiority Effect[edit]

Keep The article has since been worked on and provides a great deal of important information on a subject that was previously not found on Wikipedia. It discusses the history of the effect, and also discusses how one can test the word superiority effect. RIT_Group 11:45, 24 February 2006 (ET)

Original research, in the clearest sense of the term. Wikipedia is not a scientific journal. Daniel Case 05:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fightindaman 05:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: a Google search brings up 10,500 hits for the term [1], so it's deserving of an entry. But the tone and approach of the current article are clearly inappropriate for an encyclopedia per WP:NOR. I've tagged it for cleanup. bcasterline^talk 06:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Clean. psch e mp | talk 06:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bcasterline. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 09:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bcasterline. Lukas ^(T.|@) 09:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep some editing has been done, and the content is much more general now. Andy 23:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bcasterline. – Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 10:50, 26 February 2006 (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.