Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unique selling language

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:37, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unique selling language[edit]

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

Minor neologism, supported only by a single link to a blog. There's no evidence here, nor can I find, that this term is at all in current usage. Note: don't mistake this for "unique selling proposition", a different term that is in common usage (in its technical field). So the article topic fails WP:GNG and the article fails WP:RS and WP:NOTNEO. Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 14:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 14:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very few hits via Google. Seems to be used by 2 or 3 organisations at most, and doesn't seem to have entered wider use. Lack of discussion in reliable sources: mentions are mostly from agency copy. Colapeninsula (talk) 13:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable neologism. SL93 (talk) 23:40, 24 April 2017 (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.