Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naturbia

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. east.718 at 17:21, January 13, 2008

[edit] Naturbia

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

Neologism with no evidence of widespread usage. 25 unique ghits, nothing on Google Scholar. MER-C 11:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 11:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong delete. The article starts out "Naturbia (trademark pending)". Seems like spam that went unnoticed until now. Hasn't even reached neologism status: someone's trying to use this article to coin the term (protologism) - TheBilly^Talk 14:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Delete: a search on the Internet brings up links using this WP:NEO, but they refer either to the apparent creator of the article or to a woman with a claim to have written a book with the same name as the article. There is no evidence for the existence of the book. The website http://www.naturbia.com has no content, but implies that this article is essentially WP:SPAM. Mh29255 (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. The term itself is not notable, although it could easily be covered in the biographical article for Kvan/Karakiewicz, who seem arguably notable for their urban design work. Backwards way to go about things. --Dhartung | Talk 22:36, 7 January 2008 (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.