“neogeography” disparait de Wikipédia

L’entrée neogeography a disparu de l’encyclopédie en ligne Wikipédia. D’après les discussions il s’agit avant tout d’un problème de sources fiables plus que de la remise en cause théorique du terme. Les principaux discutant n’étant pas des spécialistes, mais à priori des profils actifs sur Wikipédia. Cependant cette suppression illustre quand même l’aspect confidentiel de ce néologisme.

À noter qu’il s’est écoulé 5 ans entre la première discussion et la dernière qui a débouché sur la suppression.

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. – Mailer Diablo 23:19, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neogeography

• Delete. This is either gibberish, vanity, or an ad (hard to tell which). Whatever it is, it’s worthless and not to mention is copyvio. –Blackcap | talk 18:37, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I’m guessing that this is a blurb about an obscure software product, but it’s so vague as to be useless. ManoaChild 22:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity. *drew 01:41, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 

Neogeography

AfDs for this article:  

Articles for deletion/Neogeography

Articles for deletion/Neogeography (2nd nomination)

Neogeography (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: “Neogeography” – news · books · scholar · free images)

Article advertises a Neologism that has not gained wide usage. The sources cited are first party and are unreliable. Alpha Quadrant (talk) 14:34, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

• Comment – Although an article on this topic was deleted in 2005, this represents an expanded and improved incarnation. No opinion as of now about inclusion-worthiness. Carrite (talk) 15:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
• Delete No WP:Reliable sources provided. Article isn’t even clear about what the term means. Not exactly a neologism (it’s apparently been used by various people – it doesn’t take much creativity to add “neo-” to a word), but a poorly defined term that has not gained general acceptance. –MelanieN (talk) 15:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Source : All Points Blog