Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human disguise (2nd nomination)
Setting aside the interpretation of what this means to the discussion about  I think a mistaken assumption perpetuated by the lead of the entry has to be clarified.  The first sentence of the lead claims that human disguise is "''a'' concept in computer science, fantasy, folklore, mythology, religion, literary tradition, iconography and science fiction" (emphasis and wikilinking choice mine).  The idea that it is "a", or one, concept across these fields is patently false and clearly not supported by any source used in the entry -- those who doubt this should note that the most salient quotes from the sources used have been provided in most of them as support.  Read them, you'll find nothing to support this claim, in fact the idea that it is "a" concept even within any of these fields is dubious at best and again not supported by any given sources.  The reason I bring this up is that the language of the entry seems to have misled people at this AfD, such as Fences and Windows above, or else these people are using sloppy and inaccurate expressions.   Either way I do not think anyone should be misled about this.  The lead of the entry is making a very false claim.  If it were to say that human disguises of various kinds can be identified in the literature of ... that would be a different matter.  This distinction is not simply nitpicky either, it is quite meaningful to the objections that some of us have to the entry
— User:PelleSmith, 02:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:SYNTH (Wikipedia:No original research)