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 both articles speedily deleted: Schizopop under CSD G7 (author blanked the page) and SchizoPoP Manifesto under CSD G11(unambiguous advertising or promotion). JamesBWatson (talk) 13:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schizopop[edit]

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

Non-notable neologism per WP:NEO, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, highly WP:PROMO wording. Proposed deletion reverted without edit summary by the article's creator. Gurt Posh (talk) 10:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reasons. Note that in this edit summary the article's creator notes that the article is about his own work. Gurt Posh (talk) 10:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —Gurt Posh (talk) 10:59, 30 June 2011 (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.