Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prototechnology

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - brenneman^{L} 10:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prototechnology

Prototechnology is a real word. It's probably not technically a neologism since it was used in this 1979 NASA document - http://history.nasa.gov/CP-2156/ch4.4.htm - though it is very rarely used, having only 77 google hits, mostly garbage.

At any rate, the real word "prototechnology" refers to use of tools prior to technology. For example, a caveman banging two rocks together to start a fire would be prototechnology. This article gives some nonsensical definition of prototechnology, claiming that it has something to do with technology used for marketing communications.

So while "prototechnology" is a real word, this article isn't really about that real word. If you look at the article's history, the contributor originally credited two individuals with coining the term in 2006 (a patently false statement) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prototechnology&oldid=52494536. BigDT 21:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Google scholar and google books come up with a handful of hits, but no usages that are clearly what the article is claiming the term is about. (I'm not about to go buy the limited books to see how it is used there.) I can't see this article ever rising to be more than a dicdef - and the current content is not the appropriate dicdef. Current version doesn't meet WP:V, probably can't meet WP:V using WP:RS. GRBerry 22:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but iff (if and only if) the article is transformed into something that actually talks about the title subject and not how it got its name. M1ss1ontomars2k4 22:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per BigDT unless the article is rewritten to be about cavemen learning to use sticks and stones as tools. Fan1967 22:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Even if the article was about the correct usage that would probably be a candidate for wiktionary. If the article first defined the word correctly and then the meat of the article described instances of prototechnology, those would likely be original research or summaries of information from multiplle articles containing more depth.--Fuhghettaboutit
• Delete. The term is real, and probably notable, but the article itself is talking about something else entirely. -Sean Curtin 03:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this article was originally vanity spam. It is now about the term as coined by the guy at the NASA conference, but is either non-notable or a dictdef. Just zis Guy you know? 10:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.