Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precall

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. --Ryan Delaney talk 05:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Precall
Vanity neologism. Despite requests made on its talk page one week ago, there is no evidence of the general use of this term anywhere outside this book. Also, no evidence that the author is "of" the university cited in the article (in staff/student directories), and no evidence that the book cited in the article is not a vanity publication (as per no original research) - especially when details for purchasing it are advertised through the article! Ziggurat 00:53, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research. -- BD2412 talk 03:38, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The information here is not notable and would be better placed at a page for the book, which itself is not notable and would be better placed at the page of the writer, who in turn is not notable himself.  So delete.  Aquillion 06:35, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR, based on an apparently self-published book. MCB 07:42, 13 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.