Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Incognition

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. - Mailer Diablo 07:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Incognition

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

Likely neologism, probably unverifiable as a google search turns up LITERALLY no hits at all (the search to incognition alone turns up lots of false hits, and none gives this definition. There MAY be print references to this, but right now this looks like possible self-promotion of a single person's theories, and probably non-notable and unverifiable. Relevent guidelines WP:N, WP:V, WP:OR. Jayron32|talk|contribs 00:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. No sources present to assert the existence of a "notion" of incognition, not just a merely dictionary definition. Baristarim 06:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Could be a hoax since no sources indicate its existence. Chris! _ct 06:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete probable hoaxBalloonman 07:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete nn unsourced neologism or hoax. Doczilla 08:55, 4 November 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.