Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GUI Design Principles

Badly wikified, unsourced, possibly original research. - Sikon 14:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy delete It reads like spam to me. I put it as db-spam. The Evil Clown _{Please review me!} 14:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Not spam (what for?) but plain old WP:OR. Sandstein 15:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Deletion is not the answer to the problems with this article. Simple editing is the answer to the problems with this article. It's a very bad article on a subject that has been the subject of books and papers, two of which (although there are many more) are cited in the article. The way to deal with it is to take the books and papers in hand and edit the article. That requires ordinary editors to be bold and use the tools that they posess to write, and does not require either AFD or an administrator to hit any buttons. AFD is not cleanup. Keep. Uncle G 15:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Transwiki to Wikibooks. They are right; this is no place for wikipedia, but we definitely need these for wikibooks. George Leung 16:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Keep A good article can be written about this, it is encyclopedic, there are sources. The present one is a start. The first sentence should read There are generally agreed (footnotes) standards.... and then discuss them. DGG 06:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)