Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ganjapreneur


 * 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   Soft Redirect. As there is currently no entry for this word at Wiktionary, I'm deleting for now, but it can be restored as soon as there's an entry to point to. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Ganjapreneur

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Neologism. Yes, there is coverage, but this is, at best, a dicdef. Wiktionary, yes, Wikipedia, no. Fiddle   Faddle  09:44, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * keep While I agree it is a neologism, it is one that describes a new and growing class of entrepreneur. The article goes beyond a dicdef in that it describes that new class of entrepreneur and the social milieu/phenomena/impact attending it. Dloh  cierekim  14:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2013 (UTC)




 * Soft redirect to Wiktionary per WP:NOTDICDEF. Right now this is too loosely defined, referring to virtually anyone who profits from anything related to cannabis. Given the pace of decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States (and in other jurisdictions), this could someday easily be a redirect to an article that mentions the term, perhaps a new article about the cannabis industry (Economics of legal cannabis?) or an existing article such as Drug liberalization. Gobōnobō  + c 04:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect It's certainly a valid term, appearing in a fairly large number of international papers. I agree with Gobōnobō  + re: a future article. Within a year or two it will need a new article. scope_creep talk 18:19, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect per above reasonings. Technical 13 (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2013 (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.