Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Low poly
to polygonal mesh. Beyond the trivial definition, the article is almost entirely |original research and full of unencyclopedic trvialites. The sole source cited also defines high poly. Want an article on that? "High poly is awesome, almost like the real thing, blah, blah. But it's computationally expensive. Wow! Pixar does it using micropolygons. This justifies an article for the term high poly all by itself." There's no in-depth coverage of either of these topics, because they aren't really topics. There are perhaps two paragraphs that are worth keeping from this article, the vague definitions, and the one on normal and bump mapping. Everything else in this article is chaff
— User:FuFoFuEd, 04:15, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)