Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eye movement in scene viewing

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 Keep. Michig (talk) 10:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eye movement in scene viewing

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

Delete per WP:NOTESSAY. Tchaliburton (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator. I no longer think this is a personal essay. Tchaliburton (talk) 08:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

essay-like qualities have been removed, please let me know if there is anything I can do to improve this article without resulting in deletion CDMcKee (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a personal essay and this very specific topic fails WP:GNG. No amount of editing is going to rescue this. Tchaliburton (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain to me why this is still a personal essay, so I don't make another mistake? I am trying to report information without any ulterior motives other than to provide impartial knowledge. Also, can it be said that this is too specific in comparison to other similar pages such as Eye movement in reading and Eye movement in music reading? CDMcKee (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone over what I have written and agree that it is too complicated and technical for users to understand (if that was what you were meaning), so in any subsequent work I'll make sure it is easier to read. Thanks for your input CDMcKee (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioral science-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nomination is based upon WP:NOTESSAY. That advises us to avoid, "personal essays that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinions of experts)". But the page in question is not a personal essay of this sort as the author and his personal views are largely invisible and the statements made are well supported by reasonably expert sources. As an example of such sources, see Eye Movement Control During Scene Viewing which amply demonstrates the notability of the topic. There's not much needed here except some ordinary editing but AFD is not cleanup. We should also thank the author for his contribution and apologise for this vexatious process. Andrew D. (talk) 12:55, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A notable topic. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], (more Google Scholar results). Also, the article at this time is not written as a personal essay and is not based upon original research. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:29, 13 December 2014 (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.