Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connection economy


 * 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 of the nomination was delete.  Sango 123  17:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Connection economy
Neologism - article admits as much. Cheese Sandwich 03:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Totally unsourced too. --IslaySolomon 03:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Also see the talk page. Creator seems confused as to WP:NOT. --IslaySolomon 04:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. original research, unsourced and a protologism. Need Freakofnature to coin a new term for this --Peripitus (Talk) 04:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:NOR, WP:V, and WP:NEO. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 04:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as a proto/neologism created by the author, WP:NEO refers.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)   04:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP is not designed to stimulate discussion of new ideas, especially those that are not sourced. SM247 My Talk  23:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Alias Flood 23:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: We have articles on eg Web 2.0 - it's a question of whether the neologism has caught on. Geoff Cohen, Senior Consultant, Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Center for Business Innovation uses the term which has 15,000 Google hits. O'Reilly uses it - he's on the pulse of internet ideas having helped get Web 2.0 started (92,000,000 hits for comparison). OTOH, Google in the UK gives only 62 hits, so it seems a US phenomenon which hasn't caught on in real life away from the internet hype (ie in the UK). I would tend towards delete, but won't propose to delete a US idea just because it hasn't caught on in the UK. Stephen B Streater 21:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Possibly a year ago this term could have been considered a neologism, but not now. I will update the entry to reflect latest research and add significant references.  This entry should be seen on a par with The Experience Economy and the Attention economy. Graeme Codrington 19:40, 7 July 2006
 * 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.