Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bioefficeology

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. Courcelles 13:36, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bioefficeology

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

Non-notable, newly coined neologism. E. Fokker (talk) 18:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:NEO and WP:GNG. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 19:12, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Guoguo12's reasoning, plus WP:OR. Cullen328 (talk) 20:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The term was coined during an environmental design class taught by Dr. Robert Schutzki in the fall of 2010.... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 22:43, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Try again in five years, when it has replaced other terms as predicted. —Tamfang (talk) 02:25, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because this is obviously not a widely used term that is out there in the lexicon of the english language. It appears to be a neologism WP:NEO, and as such is unsupported OR. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 03:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 01:50, 8 November 2010 (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.