| Revision as of 20:26, 21 November 2007 editTim Ross (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers7,867 edits weak delete recommendation← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:19, 23 November 2007 edit undoAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers217,359 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was'''delete, replace by redirect'''. The article is nothing but exposition of the originator of the neologism. No evidence of 3rd party active usage of the term presented. `']] 08:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|T}} | {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|T}} | ||
| Line 19: | Line 26: | ||
| *'''Keep''' Worth noting that Sterling didn't coin the term in his capacity as a sci-fi author, but for a design class he was teaching. It's since spread well beyond him, as others have noted above. ] (]) 18:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Worth noting that Sterling didn't coin the term in his capacity as a sci-fi author, but for a design class he was teaching. It's since spread well beyond him, as others have noted above. ] (]) 18:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Weak Delete''' Per Laudak's comments, I, too, can find little usage beyond that connected with Sterling. It may be notable that there is a company by the name Spime Inc. which has "Spime" as a registered trademark, accounting for quite a few search-engine hits. ]·<sup>]</sup> 20:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC) | *'''Weak Delete''' Per Laudak's comments, I, too, can find little usage beyond that connected with Sterling. It may be notable that there is a company by the name Spime Inc. which has "Spime" as a registered trademark, accounting for quite a few search-engine hits. ]·<sup>]</sup> 20:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Revision as of 08:19, 23 November 2007
- 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 wasdelete, replace by redirect. The article is nothing but exposition of the originator of the neologism. No evidence of 3rd party active usage of the term presented. `'Míkka>t 08:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Spime
A sci-fi neologism of a sci fi writer Bruce Sterling. No evidence of any serious usage beyond Sterling's writings and some blogs. Laudak 00:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Selective merge and redirect to Bruce Sterling. No in-depth coverage, but wide enough coverage per Google news search that it's sensible someone would be searching for the term on here. ~Eliz81 01:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: What exactly you mean by "google news coverage". In my google 4 news: one hit for Sterling's and 3 hits for a "Spime, Inc." of dubious notability. Laudak 01:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- This is the search I ran. ~Eliz81 05:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Did you care to look thru this short list terminated in 2006? It was a blip, sizzled. Laudak (talk) 04:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: What exactly you mean by "google news coverage". In my google 4 news: one hit for Sterling's and 3 hits for a "Spime, Inc." of dubious notability. Laudak 01:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - it looks like there's enough coverage on Google News and other sources to establish notability. Snigbrook 03:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: Per NEO, and notability (4 hits ain't going to cut it). - Rjd0060 05:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: Per Rjd0060. Tiptoety 05:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- keep widespread coverage, particularly in the academic/design theory sphere Artw 05:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Obviously you didnt check this list: 50% are the typo for "spline", both in biology and maths :-) 30% are foreign langauge word with different meanings. Laudak (talk) 04:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per Artw; concept is widely utilized in the academic literature. Skomorokh 10:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Can non members vote? There's no question this term has gained acceptance beyond Sterling's writing in the theory of digital objects and physical computing.
- Keep Per Artw. PAW (talk) 22:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Darrik2 (talk) 23:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Worth noting that Sterling didn't coin the term in his capacity as a sci-fi author, but for a design class he was teaching. It's since spread well beyond him, as others have noted above. Poisonink (talk) 18:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Delete Per Laudak's comments, I, too, can find little usage beyond that connected with Sterling. It may be notable that there is a company by the name Spime Inc. which has "Spime" as a registered trademark, accounting for quite a few search-engine hits. Tim Ross· 20:26, 21 November 2007 (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.