Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cycle Time

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 was delete. Sandstein 10:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cycle Time

Cycle Time (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Originally speedied as a neologism, which is not speedy-able. Anyone think it's notable? Daniel Case 00:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment A quick look at google shows it does have some use Google Results, but on the same hand GHITS aren't notability, and it looks like some of them are for completely different things --Lucid 01:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It is neo. The very definition of cycle implies time. The phrase itself is to wide spread to be specifically meaning cycle time of production of a product.--Dacium 03:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
• I think it's a valid concept when viewed in the context of Supply chain management and in manufacturing, but I'm not excited about the article as it's currently written. It teeters on the brink of original research, and it doesn't cite any references. The article isn't a neologism, but I wouldn't miss it if it were deleted. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:01, 12 August 2007 (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.