Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DNA art
Appearance
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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- DNA art (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Disputed PROD. Non-notable art form. The references do not establish notability as they all deal with the collection and processing of DNA generally and not with the art form itself. Fails the general notability guideline. Also rather spammy with a helping of WP:NOTHOWTO. ukexpat (talk) 20:27, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- ukexpat (talk) 20:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - As per nom. I very nearly PRODed it myserlf because I couldn't find a suitable CSD criterion for it. It's more about obtaining and processing DNA samples. The source that is provided is not reliable within the ;eaning of WP:RS --Kudpung (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Most of the article merely rehashes the PCR and electrophoresis process without any WP:RS indicating why DNA art itself is notable. Likely WP:SPAM. --Kinu t/c 22:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. DNA has provided the basis for some artworks, such as Marc Quinn's portrait of Sir John Sulston. But that work wasn't about the visualisation of the DNA, more the actual DNA. An article with this title might exist in the future, but this ain't it.--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Reliable sources aren't used. Zane Murphy (talk) 13:28, 29 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.