Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Productioneering

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Productioneering

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable per WP:NEO. Only one self published source found. (see p. 9) No indication that this is a Navy-wide program. At least one different use of the same term found. —UncleDouggie (talk) 06:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - this appears to be a (rather awful) in-house slogan. Nick-D (talk) 02:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Anotherclown (talk) 07:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non-notable. Doesn't seem to be WP:MADEUP, but is certainly a WP:NEO in limited use by a very small group (this applies as well). Seems to be one of the latest in a long line of military buzzwords that seek to keep funding for something by sounding cool. bahamut0013^words _deeds 23:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Simply non-notable, as said above. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 16:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.