Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecotivity


 * 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. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 15:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Ecotivity

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No notability or useful sources to speak of. Robincantin (talk) 15:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete this is basically a DICDEF. Oaktree b (talk) 16:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think that this is more appropriate for Wiktionary. There's not enough discussion of the concept to make it any more than a short definition. Epa101 (talk) 20:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Environment. Skynxnex (talk) 16:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete A brief WP:BEFORE couldn't provide me any good references about this topic, and the only one in the page is a passing mention (see WP:TRIVIAL), so I think this should be deleted. NeverRainsButPours (talk) 17:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. This would be a pretty standard WP:NEOLOGISM delete. Not used in sources to a sufficient degree as others above already covered. KoA (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - I get nothing from a Google/GNews/GScholar search and the existing sources do not provide significant coverage. This is a neologism with no reliable sources provided which discuss its use. WJ94 (talk) 16:18, 16 December 2022 (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.