Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solutionary (2nd nomination)

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 deleted by User:Anthony Bradbury. (Non-admin closure) "Pepper" @ 03:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Solutionary

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

The topic has not received significant coverage in reliable sources, and also qualifies for deletion per WP:NEO. (Note that the previous deleted article under this name was about a different topic, a company). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:30, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional effort by the person who created the term, he's clearly trying to make "fetch" happen. JamesG5 (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A neologism which has not received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Of course, people promoting the term use it a lot. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:27, 16 April 2016 (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.