Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folknography

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 06:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Folknography[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence for the use of this term by anyone other than its inventor. Article was dePRODded by original editor, who added third ref (Kobsa), but this paper does not mention Folknography. Fails WP:NEOLOGISM. PamD 07:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Book cited is a custom publication. Drmies (talk) 18:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as entirely original research. Bearian (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - one person's ill-conceived conation. Scholar cites show that it has minimal traction in the academic world. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. CesareAngelotti (talk) 14:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.