Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikinomics

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 02:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinomics[edit]

Neologism, original research. Some 60 Google hits, only 16 unique. I don't see any of those that appear to match the neologism being coined in this article. Ifnord 14:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agreed. Jim 14:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. The creator's article growth calculations fail to factor in deletion. Bobby1011 14:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:NOR and neologism. --Ter e nc e Ong 15:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bobby. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The author of this upcoming book Don Tapscott is notable, but this book-in-progress is not. Possible advertisement. Monkeyman^(talk) 16:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved most of the content to wikisource but I just got a note from Zhaladshar

I just noted that you added a page called "Wikinomics" to Wikisource. I should point out that this document reads like something that you yourself wrote, and since there is no information regarding a possible source for it, I'm guessing you did write it. Unfortunately, this type of document isn't covered under Wikisource. I would propose that you export the page to probably Wikipedia, where a document of this kind is accepted. Thank you for your involvement in Wikisource!—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/User_talk:Dmccreary"

--Dan 13:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment I am sorry for Dan being given incorrect information. Please read s:Wikisource:What Wikisource includes before telling anyone what Wikisource accepts. In fact anyone who has ever voted Move to Wikisource, please take a minute to read this as it has been recently re-written to explain more throughly. If anyone has any questions please send them my way, as I am active on both sites.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 14:27, 24 February 2006 (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.