Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ideate (3rd nomination)


 * 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 speedy delete (G4) —  Tivedshambo   (t/c) 18:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Ideate
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary and not a place for non-notable neologisms.
 * Tagged for speedy deletion G4. Vicenarian  (T · C) 15:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as a repost. I'm also requesting salting over at RPP. - 2 ... says you, says me 16:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: fwiw, "ideate" isn't a neologism - the Oxford English Dictionary traces it back to 1610 - and I could see a potential article here about the term's use in philosophy. But the current article, and the definition format, is absolutely off-topic and should go. Gonzonoir (talk) 16:24, 1 July 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.