Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sound Melody Theory

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) 01:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sound Melody Theory

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

Aside from Wikipedia not being a dictionary to begin with, the term appears to have been coined by the original creator of this page. It doesn't establish third party verification and/or usage of this term. No external links or references to this term as described aside from links to the individual words in the title. In addition Wikipedia isn't a clearinghouse for invented phrases of spurious origin. DJBullfish 09:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with deletion, for reasons stated. Piano non troppo (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I do not think that this article satisfies any of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Purposely, the article's references are funny enough, from Wikipedia itself! Well, since the article appears to be a dictionary page, I agree with the deletion process. But why are you placing this on the AfDs? You should have CSDed this page instead. ----_{Boeing7107isdelicious|SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN} 10:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Under which speedy criteria? There isn't one to cover original research. -- Whpq (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as original research. -- Whpq (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2009 (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.