Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psepholograph
This looks like pure |original research from a 1993 Master's thesis. I can't find any evidence for the author's claims that this is an "accepted term" or that it has succeeded the Mackerras pendulum in any sense, be that use by psephologists or media publication to the public—in fact, while the article is scant on any technical detail or illustration whatsoever, that seems to be the case for the broader internet, where I can find not one illustration or example of a psepholograph outside of Balogh's thesis, and believe me, I am ''very'' interested in psephology, visualisation and related concepts. The Reddit question indicates that the article's very existence is a problem—the suggestions of its widespread use is confusing and even misleading for readers who then find no details or examples of the concept on Wikipedia, Google or anywhere. As the nominator has outlined, the references seem reasonably numerous, but upon deeper inspection merely verify Balogh's employers and authorship of the thesis, with the last three actually referring to Mackerras's pendulum, not the psepholograph
— User:Canley, 09:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)