- 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, there's agreement here that this is not an encyclopedic article. -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Focus error
- Focus error ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not sure what to make of this page - it is essentially two dictionary definitions for two different 'focus error's. I can't find that wither are notable. Boleyn ( talk) 20:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 21:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete (or as a second choice, maybe redirect to Optical aberration?). The first sentence is WP:DICDEF, and the second is about a specific camera's hardware malfunctioning, most of which falls under WP:NOTGUIDE and the rest lacks notability. I could see a point for a stub article if there was a classical photography problem of bad focus due to some mechanical reason, with references etc. but that would be a different article than what exists now. Tigraan ( talk) 10:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete it just seems to be a moan about a problem someone had with their specific camera Samatarou ( talk) 03:45, 26 January 2016 (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.
- 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, there's agreement here that this is not an encyclopedic article. -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Focus error
- Focus error ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not sure what to make of this page - it is essentially two dictionary definitions for two different 'focus error's. I can't find that wither are notable. Boleyn ( talk) 20:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 21:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete (or as a second choice, maybe redirect to Optical aberration?). The first sentence is WP:DICDEF, and the second is about a specific camera's hardware malfunctioning, most of which falls under WP:NOTGUIDE and the rest lacks notability. I could see a point for a stub article if there was a classical photography problem of bad focus due to some mechanical reason, with references etc. but that would be a different article than what exists now. Tigraan ( talk) 10:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete it just seems to be a moan about a problem someone had with their specific camera Samatarou ( talk) 03:45, 26 January 2016 (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.