Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speculative design

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speculative design

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

Unreferenced essay written by a group of students (see talk page). Proposed for deletion as original research, which has been removed by the article's creator. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the initial PRODer and since Mike Rosoft edit conflicted me bringing it to AfD. Original research, personal essay that has no salvageable content from which an encyclopedia article could be built. --Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 05:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Also "Hi We are a bunch of students" — shared accounts are not permitted, and given the removal of the prod, we might expect some SPA comments. "would improvise the article" pretty well confirms OR Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:41, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete likely and draft and userfy if needed as the only links I found were some at Books but nothing else aside from that. SwisterTwister talk 05:19, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to meet notability requirements. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:29, 10 October 2015 (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.