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 14:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
non-notable neogolism, it was previously on proposed deletion. Kungfu Adam(talk) 14:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom with just 5 Ghits--Jusjih 15:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Delete, neologism, no sources cited to support common use. —C.Fred (talk) 22:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom, unless some evidence of its purported use in academic circles surfaces. Shimeru 01:09, 15 August 2006 (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.