Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Datatecture

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. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 08:01, Dec. 26, 2005

[edit] Datatecture

"This is a very pov article that reads almost like a commercial for the website it links to. The author did not provide any evidence that the word was first used by the man mentioned in the article. They also did not provide any evidence that the term is now commonly used.DeleteTheRingess 19:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, can't call it a neologism because it's around since 1996, but it's not notable or encyclopedic. Stifle 23:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Note: relisting 16/12/05, which AfD thinks is still the 15th. Hrmph. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete No evidence it was coined as stated, no evidence it has any significant currency, article appears to be an attempt to get traffic. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 16:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, per above Tom Harrison ^(talk) 16:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Philip Pocock. --King of All the Franks 14:04, 18 December 2005 (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.