Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petrocide


 * 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. (aeropa gitica) 22:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Petrocide
Not a respected or well-used term. No citations of secondary sources. No credible references without an NPOV dispute found through a quick google search. Msoron 04:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreement here. Delete away. --Sean Lotz 05:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Msoron. It is terrible that it has existed since December 2004. -- Kjkolb 06:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as dicdef. I can't see that being "respected or well-used" falls within any WP guideline or policy.  Agree there seems to be little notability of the phrase with only 36 distinct Ghits.  I would go as far as to argue the article should be deleted as a neologism, since none of the Google hits indicate anything beyond a made-up word to describe the abuses of Big Oil.  Tychocat 10:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as an incorrect dicdef. Petrocide is the act of killing a rock. Duh. J I P  | Talk 14:49, 27 August 2006 (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.