Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crisis informatics

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 redirect. - Zeibura ^{( talk )} 16:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crisis informatics

This appears to be original research in an undeveloped field. Please feel free to prove me wrong by finding additional sources for context and verification. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you explain, first, what was wrong with the two sources already cited in the article when you nominated it for deletion? You should also explain what steps you took in order to find other sources, a step that is required in order to make a nomination that is actually properly based upon our Wikipedia:Deletion policy, because from your nomination it appears that you didn't look for sources yourself at all in the 1 minute 44 seconds between this article being created and your nominating it for deletion. As explained in deletion policy, and in several other places including the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion and User:Uncle G/Wikipedia triage, you should look for sources yourself before nominating an article for deletion on these grounds. So: What looking for sources did you do in those 1 minute and 44 seconds? Uncle G (talk) 04:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I didn't do a Google search. I did notice that the article writer's username was identical to the author of the two articles cited, so I was not sure if the term was in wider usage. Right now I would also support a merge with "Disaster informatics." Shalom (Hello • Peace) 13:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete, neologism coined BY THE ARTICLE'S ORIGINAL AUTHOR. Self-promotional. Add a warning to the author against self-promotion. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- … coined in 2005, and adopted by others in the years since, including Leysia Palen at the University of Colorado and the Western Disaster Center (who both make it clear that this is in fact just an alternative name for Disaster informatics (AfD discussion)). Am I really the only editor here who has put this string into Google Web and had a look at the results? Uncle G (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non-notable WP:NEO. Mh29255 (talk) 14:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Thanks to Uncle G. I think Disaster informatics is the more comprehensive, widely accepted term. Pastordavid (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, a neologism for the term "Disaster informatics]]", as outlined above. Lankiveil ^{(complaints | disco)} 03:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Redirect - for now, I think the article would be better suited as a redirect to disaster informatics per above. However, any other independant sources referring specifically to this term would warrant a keep. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 07:28, 28 January 2008 (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.