Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nearables


 * 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 no consensus. A merger might be explored further on the talk page.  Sandstein  09:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Nearables

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

Appears to be a non-notable neologism. –– FormalDude  (talk)  02:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Internet. –– FormalDude   (talk)  02:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Well the WaPo article uses it, we could probably argue GNG is met based on the other sources, it didn't catch on as a term though. The article sounds flowery, the bottom paragraphs at least. Needs a rewrite. Oaktree b (talk) 03:18, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It's still around, barely. paid Forbes Council thing article uses it in 2021, but it's not widespread. I wouldn't be terribly disturbed if we deleted the article, on the fence at this point. What do others thing? Oaktree b (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it should probably be merged and redirected to Bluetooth Low Energy beacon. –– FormalDude  (talk)  03:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. It may be a neologism, but it is a neologism to name a notable class of devices and therefore a valid article. PUblished scholarly papers using the term and discussing these devices include
 * "Sleep devices: wearables and nearables, informational and interventional, consumer and clinical"
 * "Design and Development of a Nearable Wireless System to Control Indoor Air Quality and Indoor Lighting Quality"
 * "Wearable and Nearable Biosensors and Systems for Healthcare"
 * "Multispectral camera fusion increases robustness of ROI detection for biosignal estimation with nearables in real-world scenarios
 * Also some discussion in these books SpinningSpark 22:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  04:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting, two potential redirect/merge targets mentioned. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge into smart object . This article claims they're a "further development" of IoT, but wireless sensors already existed, so the "development" appears to be... attaching things to things? I suspect this page was created as a stealth ad for Estimote. &#x2130; mi1y&#x29fc;T&middot;C&#x29fd; 08:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see how "already existed" is an argument for deletion. One could say the same thing about Internet of things – the internet certainly already existed and things on the internet (that is, addressable things with sensors) already existed. SpinningSpark 09:32, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hm. I agree with what you say but disagree with your conclusion, so I'll try to express the same thing differently: this seems to me like it's not a substantially separate concept from smart objects, and the only new development is that some company made up a word for marketing purposes. That, in itself, does not deserve a separate page, in my view. Maybe a redirect, given that people do seem to use the word sometimes. &#x2130; mi1y&#x29fc;T&middot;C&#x29fd; 08:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a merge of a few sentences is in order? –– FormalDude  (talk)  09:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I would not object to that if people feel there's salvageable content, and I've updated my !vote above to say so. &#x2130; mi1y<sub style="color:#b766d2;">&#x29fc;T&middot;C&#x29fd; 07:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that nearables are a class of smart object, but they are hardly a synonym so, yes, they are a "substantially different concept". Mobile device, wearable technology, and modern printer (computing) are all also smart objects but not nearables.  We can, in principle, have as many articles on subsets of smart objects as we want.  The only question to answer is whether there is enough material available to fill a standalone page. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 08:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep The subject is clearly notable, but the article likely needs to be reframed to be about a term which failed to catch on rather than an actual class of devices. Chagropango (talk) 06:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble buying "failed to catch on". The results in gscholar are spread from 2014 to the present year. The (often inaccurate) count by google says there are 520 results, but I have checked through to verify that there are at least 100 papers using the term. As far as I can see, they are all in the context of our article. Similarly, gbooks has dozens of results spread from 2015 to 2022. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 08:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.