Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge avatar

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. Golbez 20:09, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Knowledge avatar

Not notable. Vanity (mainly by User:Emilianodelau, who founded [Knowledge Environments], who invented this pointless trademarked term and waffled on in a 60k PDF. r3m0t ^talk 22:40, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. According to policy "An article should not be dismissed as "vanity" simply because the subject is not famous. Furthermore, an article is not "vanity" simply because it was written by its subject." The article does not refer to any company or individual. It is written in the neutral with the express interest of being informative. The concept Knowledge Avatar has been used in other contexts such as the Columbia University seminar on Innovations in Education. E. C. De Laurentiis 00:39, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Whether it's WP:VAIN or not may be up to discussion, but nevertheless this is a neologism. With about 450 googles, so it isn't anywhere near established. Delete per WP:NOT. Radiant_* 08:40, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn, neologism. RickK 21:00, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable, neologism, original research. --Carnildo 21:23, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. What Carnildo said. Quale 06:00, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, neologism.--Prem 03:09, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.