Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameAbilitation


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

GameAbilitation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The title is unquestionably a neologism (Google search). The strange reference to a "research non-profit movement" on the talk page suggests that this is actually about a specific organisation. Too much of an essay and the refs are not specific enough. &mdash; RHaworth 01:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 13:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Some of this might be profitably merged at serious game, even if "GameAbilitation" sounds like somebody's lame idea for a new buzzword. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I can find little evidence that this term exists, except for a suspicion that Tonybrooks was involved in the ArtAbilitation research and is citing himself. His contributions show that has cited this research frequently. This page should be deleted and further research should be done to done to check if ArtAbilitation is worthy of inclusion. Reach Out to the Truth 00:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete as WP:NEO --Teancum (talk) 16:47, 20 November 2009 (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.