Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Invisible paint

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. W.marsh 13:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Invisible paint

Invisible paint (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails WP:N and smacks of WP:OR SeizureDog 05:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep This is a notable plot device used in many forms of english language media. The article is poorly written and has little content but it is still worth whileShniken1 15:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Basically a definition of invisible paint plus a list of examples. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Otto4711 15:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Lacks WP:RS. Does indeed smack of original research. Pig^man 16:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete And I mean really weak. I guess I would change my opinion to keep if references asserting its notability could be provided, but as much as I recognize having heard about it before Wikipedia, I'm not sure whether it can be considered notable enough. --Slarti (1992) 23:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Pig. --Tikiwont 11:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

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.