Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planufacturing

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 speedy delete. no substantial content--just a definition, and possibly not even a real one DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Planufacturing

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

Non-notable neologism. Fails WP:GNG. - Mr X 20:17, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is currently only a sentence long and my first thought was that it should go in Wiktionary rather than Wikipedia. Having just looked in Wiktionary, the word is not there, which does make me think that this word could possibly be a non-existent portmanteau neologism. Vorbee (talk) 21:47, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom, not notable enough for a move to Wiktionary. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:42, 8 June 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.