Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Optimal thinking


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Optimal thinking

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. The proposer's reason was "Non-notable WP:NEOLOGISM, borderline spam for non-notable book, no reliable 3rd-party references per WP:RS, can find nothing supporting notability online." I agree on all counts. It is borderline spam (not blatant enough to speedy delete, IMO), and it completely lacks independent sourcing. The closest things to sources on the page are the book (in multiple translations) and its website. —C.Fred (talk) 02:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. MuffledThud (talk) 02:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 02:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete it's spam alright. Drawn Some (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, spam about a vapid, vague self-help coinage: describe the mental basis of best practices and peak performance. Optimal thinking can also be described as superlative realism. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I do a search and it yields (a) stuff associated with the books here (b) people using the term "optimal thinking" in regular, everyday speech, not using it to mean some sort of specialized concept. Cazort (talk) 17:34, 5 May 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.