Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Innovateurship

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Innovateurship

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

This is a neologism that is not in common use in English and has one source. (Whether it is more widely used in French is not important in the English Wikipedia.) Robert McClenon (talk) 19:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article itself says "There is no education or established definition of innovateurship so far." This is not the place to establish such a definition. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Mduvekot (talk) 19:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete brand-spanking-new neologism which doesn't even have a significant history of use by its coiner, and none at all by anyone else. Mangoe (talk) 20:37, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of the original article (as well as its translator), I have realised by now, that the publication of this article was indeed premature. Other scientists haven't had a chance to comment on/cite the presented theory, as it is still too new. Due to my PR background, I made the mistake of wanting to publish about this new scientific development as soon as possible. Thus, I support a deletion of this article until it can be verified by secondary literature.-- HillJudith (talk) 11:21, 1 August 2017 (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.