Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthropogeology

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 Speedy delete - (G7) per creator and sole contributor request. — ERcheck (talk) 02:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anthropogeology

I placed an Original Research tag on this article very early this morning, and it was simply removed by the page creator. I hoped the placing of said tag would result in some positive changes to the article, the tone of which is entirely speculative. Indeed, the first paragraph is made up almost entirely of questions, rather than assertions of fact, and it is facts which are the basis of an encyclopaedia article. Hence, the tone is not encyclopaedic. This reads as a speculative essay, in which the author ventures a possibility, or states a hunch. No such discipline as "anthropogeology" exists in any university, and the links that he provides do not, in any way, support the contentions of the article. In fact, all of the references he provides are copied straight from one of those websites with no citation. To sum up, this is an essay, with no relevant references, and offers opinion and conjecture rather than fact. Charles 23:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. The term isn't widely used, but the concept of an overlap between anthropology and geology is recognized in a number of ways, as cited in the references. Clarion University uses the term "Anthropology, Geography, and Earth Science". Lucy A. Wilson has a Ph.D. in " "Anthropology and Geology". Indiana University has a department of "Geography, Geology and Anthropology". In short, I think the discipline exists, but it doesn't have a well-settled name yet. Anthropogeology is probably a better name for the time being than "what Lucy Wilson does".--TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Awkward coinage which fails WP:NEO. Single hit on Google Scholar[1]. Single hit on Google Books[2]. 9 hits excluding wikipedia on main google [3]. Wikipedia should be conservative in evaluating new terms.There's a moral hazard to allowing even academic protologisms on Wikipedia - using Wikipedia to boost presence of term in Google could be viewed as aiding someone's academic career / positioning in academic turf wars Bwithh 02:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Willing to Delete Since I wrote the article, I will gladly remove it until the day when the term is more widely used and more papers exist on the subject. I am very willing to remove it, and I will delete it right now, since I am the one that wrote it. --joseph 02:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment If you are willing to delete it, or are asking for it to be deleted, that is one thing. However, repeatedly blanking the article is inappropriate. ---Charles 02:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
    • If you wish to delete the article, blanking it will not do. Place {{db-author}} at the top of the page. It translates to "Delete at author's request." -- Fan-1967 04:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Speedy Delete per nom. Sonic3KMaster^(talk) 03:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. It's an interesting concept, and the main trouble with it is the name. I would rather rename the article to something like "Geology of anthropology" than have it deleted. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete under CSD G7 per original author's request. --Satori Son 20:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy D.. This discipline doesn't exist. Badgerpatrol 01:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

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.