Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Dual Mirror Language of Leonardo Da Vinci

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) 02:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Dual Mirror Language of Leonardo Da Vinci

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

Pure WP:OR. Contested prod. Anthem of joy (talk) 18:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clear case of WP:OR - reads like an essay. (See also The Da Vinci Code: Decoded by the same author - currently under prod for the same reasons as this one). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 20:48, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - frankieMR (talk) 23:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it is pure WP:OR. Or shall I say "eteled" so you can hold it to a mirror? History2007 (talk) 07:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because its utter bullshit. Its not a secret code if all it is is backwards writing. Anyone could figure that out. In the Leonardo Da Vinci article it says this was done most likely because he was left handed, and it was easier that way. That makes way more sense. Dream Focus 03:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Given that this article was created by a user with a real-name account, I will refrain from publicly drawing health-related conclusions. Hans Adler 19:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Disregarding WP:OR and so on, the appropriate place for the content is a paragraph within Leonardo da Vinci, where it already is. —Tamfang (talk) 18:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research. Edward321 (talk) 02:04, 21 May 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.