Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regulatory incubator


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Regulatory incubator

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a neologism that is not in wide usage. 'Regulatory incubator' is only used in RSs when referring to the company that invented the concept. 'Regulatory umbrella' is more widely used, but not in the sense it is described in this article. If there was an article about Sturgeon Ventures then a merge/redirect would be fine, but I don't think that there are sufficient sources for this to be an independent article at the moment. SmartSE (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)




 * delete This article seems to be talking about something that business incubator firms do, along with their other services. As a term unto itself, it seems to have no traction: I get very few book or GScholar hits, and they are all either completely spurious or talk about the Civil Aeronautics Board as regulatory structure itself used to get the airline industry off the ground. Of the few references I checked, none of them actually used it as a term, and one didn't talk about regulation at all. Mangoe (talk) 13:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * keep/merge Believe the term Regulatory Incubator (or Regulatory Umbrella) is actively used by journalists and companies when searching the web for information on the services so it has a right to stay on Wikipedia, maybe in a much more concise version. Or the title could be changed to Regulatory Umbrella (if this other term is more widely used). Having said that, there's a substantial amount of coverage for Sturgeon Ventures in high quality UK publications, including the Financial Times, so probably this article should be either kept and edited down or merged/redirected to an article about Sturgeon Ventures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kt1502 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note Kt1502 has previously disclosed that they have a conflict of interest with regards to Sturgeon Ventures. SmartSE (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete Unable to find sourcing which would meet WP:GNG and address plausible WP:NEO issues. I checked the usual range of searches plus Highbeam, the latter did net a single republished press release mentioning the term, but in no way *about* the term. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:04, 17 April 2014 (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.