Deletion of Satisfaction approval voting

Comment: I criticize that this article contains undefined |euphemisms ("satisfaction"), |weasel words ("SAV aims to maximise the electorate's satisfaction.") and sentences that make absolutely no sense ("A voter's satisfaction gained for each elected candidate is independent of how many of their choices have been elected, making satisfaction additive."). Every election method tries to "maximise the electorate's satisfaction"; they only differ in how they determine the maximum satisfaction. The proposed method is a trivial modification of approval voting without any theoretic justification
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:EUPHEMISM||WP:WEASEL)

Comment: It is not getting much attention in https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1CAASUA_enUS604US605&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%22Satisfaction+approval+voting%22+(site%3Anytimes.com+OR+site%3Ausatoday.com+OR+site%3Aphiladelphiainquirer.com+OR+site%3Atime.com+OR+site%3Amiamiherald.com+OR+site%3Apittsburghpostgazette.com+OR+site%3Achicagotribune.com+OR+site%3Alatimes.com+OR+site%3Asfgate.com+OR+site%3Awsj.com+OR+site%3Amercurynews.com+OR+site%3Awashingtonpost.com+OR+site%3Asuntimes.com+OR+site%3Anj.com+OR+site%3Aboston.com+OR+site%3Anydailynews.com+OR+site%3Adenverpost.com+OR+site%3Anpr.org+OR+site%3Abaltimoresun.com+OR+site%3Acsmonitor.com+OR+site%3Adailynews.com) US national news or magazines although it seems like a great idea for our dysfunctional democracy. Article is well-written, nice diagrams, wonder if material could be kept in another article on voting methods, such as Approval voting (Brams is covered rather extensively there). If and when this topic gets coverage, we should bring it back, but until then it looks like |original research unfortunately
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)