Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sustainabilisation

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sustainabilisation

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

Unreferenced neologism, contested prod. WWGB (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found no sources at all documenting this, which wasn't that surprising as it's clearly something that joeborza (talk · contribs) made up to indirectly promote his business (whose WWW page's URL was in the first revision of the article). This is not how things work, M. Borza. Wikipedia is not an advertising billboard and we don't accept stuff that you've just made-up. This is an encyclopaedia. Delete. Uncle G (talk) 15:07, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a new word that is hardly used anywhere. No sources, not notable yet. CodeTheorist (talk) 22:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2012 (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.