Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtual Republic

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 McKenzie Wark. MBisanz ^talk 01:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Republic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Third Nature (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Two neologisms from the same book. No evidence that they have acquired any usage or are notable. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:15, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• keep Virtual Republic. WP:Deletion policy repeatedly says "improve rather than delete. "Culture in Australia" chapter 7 p161 ff. (2001) is a good start, see also the review of "Virtual Republic" by an Aussie academic at "A Review of McKenzie Wark's The Virtual Republic: Australia's Culture Wars of the 1990s - a quick Google got me both of these. I recently got Precambrian rabbit from AfD to DYK. I'd have a go at Virtual Republic myself if I wasn't already so WP-busy. --Philcha (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• open separate AFD for Third Nature - combining 2 articles in 1 AfD can only cause confusion. --Philcha (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: No, I think they're related enough to warrant combining into one AfD. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both. Not enough evidence to prove that these terms are not neologisms. There is not widespread usage of these terms, at least not yet. No prejudice against re-creation if either or both catches on later. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to McKenzie Wark, which provides useful context for these two concepts. (That article does not mention "Third Nature" yet, so a small amount of merging would be necessary.) FreplySpang 00:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both, no widespread usage. ffm 21:17, 10 November 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.