Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LOWERN (2nd 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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

LOWERN
AfDs for this article:


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

Pretty straightfoward case of WP:NEOLOGISM, and there's a pretty decent bar for scientific jargon acronyms getting an article. From that policy To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources say about the term or concept, not just sources that use the term. .. Not finding any real discussion of the acronym itself, and there are plenty of sources that discuss the underlying concepts without attempting an acronym. Article has also been unsourced since 2009, and I can't find any significant reliable sources actually focusing on the term on a level to satisfy WP:N.

The only sources that seem to tangentially show up are are a few bottom of the barrel things like teaching worksheets, student presentations, etc. or WP:CIRCULAR. What I can find for source quality doesn't seem to meet the bar for inclusion even in climate articles to show the acronym is widely used, much less a dedicated article. It really looks like a few teachers just slapped together an acronym years ago (article created in 2009) and nothing really came of it since. KoA (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. KoA (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete No substantive sources that warrant an article for a simple mneumonic:Reywas92Talk 22:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the nom that there is no sigcov. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2023 (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.