Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conflict neutral (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 10:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Conflict neutral
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Previously speedied for copyvio, stitll has major WP:POV and WP:RS issues (tag was removed by a SPA account) Mister Senseless&trade; (Speak - Contributions) 20:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC) 
 * Delete is also a wp:neo with some soapboxing to boot. P HARMBOY  ( TALK ) 23:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - spam by Ethical Diamonds Ltd trying to establish "conflict neutral" as a neologism. Somno (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. A WP:COATRACK neologism to hang advertisement on. VG &#x260E; 04:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - sounds laudable, but no independent third-party sources given. A gsearch for "conflict neutral" gives about seven different companies in the first forty hits who all claim (with the same words) to have originated the term. Looks like spam to me. Most of the other ghits in the range are either duplicates, or blog-comments that appear to originate with the company concerned. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:26, 13 October 2008 (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.