Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilderness engineering

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 redirect to Rewilding. Any useful content can be merged from the page history. T. Canens (talk) 02:17, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wilderness engineering

Wilderness engineering (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Appears to be a made up term verging on WP:NEO and self promotion. Can't find much about this on the web appears to beyond what the author has created - most of the 221 Google hits are for a company with the same name. Maybe redirecting to Rewilding would be appropriate. reddogsix (talk) 19:29, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Rewilding. That is the more established term and they seem to be the same thing. Borock (talk) 20:33, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Wilderness engineering should be kept as a separate entity from Rewilding as they are two two distinct forms of conservation! Rewilding seeks to leave nature to its own in order for nature to "restore itself", while Wilderness engineering seeks to restore a lost ecosystem by means of manual recreation (be that replanting an entire forest of introducing seemingly exotic ecological equivalents of lost fauna)! User:Jason-Luiz_Mendez (talk) 13:41, 3 August 2015 (CET) — Jason-Luiz_Mendez (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Comment - What you fail to address is the article lacks support and notability. Additionally, the article is self promotion for the author. reddogsix (talk) 14:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• delete The term "wilderness engineering" more or less belongs to the Boy Scouts: do a GBook search and you will get a lot of hits on Boys Life articles mixed in with a bunch of accidental juxtapositions. This article's use is a neologism which is manifestly promotional. Seyasirt (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge any substantial content with Rewilding. This is even the term used in the article.Pincrete (talk) 14:30, 15 August 2015 (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.