Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tentblogging


 * 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. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Tentblogging

 * – ( View AfD View log )

NN neologism. Appears to be self sourced, I couldn't find evidence of notability with a google search. Syrthiss (talk) 11:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

It would appear to be a neologism but unless you're culturally aware of this growing movement you'd know that it's not. And, this lifestyle (earning a living through online technologies) has been happening for quite some time. jleekun 8:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  — —Tom Morris (talk) 11:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable neologism. No mention of the term in Google Books, Google News, or Google Scholar: there appear to be no reliable sources mentioning the term (hence it fails WP:GNG). Nor is it clear why monetized blogging is particularly notable when Christians do it. The article history also suggests a possible WP:COI. -- 202.124.72.161 (talk) 09:31, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

how could you determine what is a non-notable neologism especially when it's a new concept based on a very historically-significant foundational concept? tentmaking is a biblical concept - see tentmaking which is a long-understood lifestyle. the methodologies of tentmaking continue to evolve as technology changes - if St. Paul was alive today would he still be making tents (he is one of the original notable tentmakers) without the use of modern web technology? probably not. Google news, google books, google scholar have not yet picked up on this advancement or evolution of a long-standing lifestyle and culture. in addition, i have no relation to the IP address noted in your comment nor have I touched those articles WP:COI. -- 202.124.72.161 (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jleekun (talk • contribs)
 * Delete for Wikipedia to have an article on a neologism we need to have reliable secondary sources that discuss the history and use of the term (WP:NEO). We can always re-create the page if this condition is met later. Qrsdogg (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2011 (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.