Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Issue-driven entrepreneurship

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 both. Singularity 02:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issue-driven entrepreneurship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

My prod tag was removed without addressing the underlying issue, so I'm bringing this article to the community. Essentially, 100% original research -- note that the article's creator indicated in an earlier revision that he had copyrighted both the article's title and the underlying concept. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominated the following related pages because the same author is apparently bent on advertising his website without any notability or reliable sources.

Enviu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Delete. This neologism isn't reliably sourced. Majoreditor (talk) 00:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both pages and all 10 redirects created to it, as per nom. KTC (talk) 00:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non-notable, poorly sourced neologism, with clear conflict-of-interest. Also, please delete the redirects to Issue-driven entrepreneurship and Enviu. nneonneo ^talk 00:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for insufficient notability of a company or organization. I would have probably attempted speedy deletion. Erechtheus (talk) 00:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a spammy article on a non-notable company. I've also speedy-tagged Enviu. Delete the redirects too. Bfigura ^(talk) 01:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as spam. (The redirects too, of course, since others are stressing the point.) I'd say it's just this side of speedy deletion. (Though it did make me laugh by recommending that the reader Google some guy's video because "its [sic] great!") AnturiaethwrTalk 01:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsourced neologisms/spam. No reliable sources to be seen. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Delete both No evidence is provided that this term or the firm are notable. -- Mattinbgn\^talk
• Speedy delete Enviu G4, so tagged. It has numerous bracketed numbers (e.g. [1], [2]) which look like a copied wikipedia entry. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 03:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I undid the G4 for Enviu. The page was speedied before and re-made; G4 is only for pages that have gone through AfD before (which Enviu hasn't). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Whoops, my bad, thanks for catching that. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 20:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, personal essay. It's even signed. JIP | Talk 04:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: nn. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 04:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above.--Berig (talk) 07:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non-Notable.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 20:31, 4 May 2008 (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.