Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keystone Principle

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. KTC (talk) 00:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keystone Principle[edit]

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

Very recent neologism with no apparent sign of notability or widespread in-depth coverage by noteworthy sources. It's certainly possible that in a year or two it *might* be a noteworthy term, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Our job is to cover it if/when it becomes notable, not to help it acheive notability. Helvetica (talk) 02:17, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NEOLOGISM. As stated by the nom lets wait and see if it gets traction. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it's a neologism. Perhaps some time in the future the term might be used more frequently and in a sustained manner by the mainstream media, but that certainly isn't the case now. MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:47, 24 February 2013 (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.