Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eco Governance


 * 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 Environmental governance. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Eco Governance

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Term used exclusively by one organization as far as is available in on the internet. Uses concepts similar to some of the topics listed at Template:Governance. Was Prodded, but creator debates, so brought here. Generally, does meet WP:Notability. Sadads (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Sadads view has no verification. The term is widely used, see internet. And of course it is not similar to any normal governance definition. Eco Governance is a term that was,is now and will be of growing significance for the future. (Small note: See conflict of interests in Sadads profile) User Ecosupporters 13 October 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecosupporters (talk • contribs) 07:19, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

 Redirect - This is a viable search for Environmental governance which covers the material without self promotion. The article Eco Governance has copy-vio's from the single source www.eco-governance.com that is not a reliable source. If this was taken away, the article would boarder on a WP:NEO. All other references that I can find in regards to this are not as a "term" but as organizations and foundations. Pmedema (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've looked in google books to see if something can be salvaged from this. But it's just a buzzword basically (one book does attempt a def, but hardly anyone else does, so that book is a wp:primary source in that respect.) The wiki article is spam, so WP:TNT and wait for more sources to write about this, if ever. Tijfo098 (talk) 12:20, 20 October 2012 (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.