Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nutriology

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. Singularity 06:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nutriology

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

Essentially spam for a book by Ken James. As a technical term "nutriology" is close to being a neologism. The article has been written by a number of spas and Papermill Press appears to be Ken James' personal imprint. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete it is just spam, imo. Springnuts 20:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as spam but without prejudice. I don't think this is a neologism -- returns a healthy number of ghits and was in use as early as 1930. - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 20:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• delete I don't even know if this Ken James is one of those in the disambig page- I doubt it.Merkinsmum 23:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable neologism. May have a few hits but we talk of nutrition and nutritionists. Never heard of a nutriologist and I work in health. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:23, 10 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.