Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People-centric

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 00:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People-centric

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

Spam for a new book, and not really true either. People-centric is not coined, it is commonly in use in newspeak organisations, from Microsoft with their people-centric IT[1] or Appian's People Centric Process Management[2]. It was commonly in use by the late 1990s, and there are already books about it, like "Humanize: How People-Centric Organizations Succeed in a Social World" from 2011[3]. Fram (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As noted, the claim is bogus. And if the term originates with a book which has not been published yet, I fail to see how it could be notable. Eseeentially an article about a non notable book.TheLongTone (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 00:50, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator and TheLongTone. Even if the word had been coined in the book the article cites, there's no way it could be notable before the book has even come out. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:29, 28 May 2014 (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.