Deletion of Summarizing in Abridged Quotation

Comment: Looks to me like |personal |instructions for misquoting people—and an extraordinarily bad idea
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:NOTHOW)

Comment: It looks like  with no notable google hits or google book sources. I don't quite understand your list btw, might be broken formatting
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: The article lost me in the first sentence when it said: "A Summary in Abridged Quotation or Summarizing in Abridged Quotation (SAQ or SAQing, i.o.)--similar in appearance to block quotation--is a protologism ...." If the article admits that it is naming the subject by a |protologism, we don't need it. If this is a legitimate topic, then don't call it a protologism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)

Comment: No |reliable sources http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Summarizing+in+Abridged+Quotation%22&btnG=Search+Books, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Summarizing%20in%20Abridged%20Quotation%22&sa=N&hl=en&tab=ps. Nothing to establish the |notability of the term. The concept seems to be  based on a number of standard editing procedures (particularly Block quotation and Abridgement). The article also refers to itself as a "protologism," which is a direct contradiction of . There's nothing to save
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NN||WP:OR||WP:NEO)