Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Equicycling

: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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:19, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

=[[Equicycling]]=

:{{la|Equicycling}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Equicycling}})

Copying reason from proposed deletion "neologism and thinly-veiled spam"

The page admits that it is a neologism Ryan Vesey (talk) 19:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

But... its a synergistic balancing of 'recycling' and 'equilibrium' that creates a new paradigm for the 21st century, allowing both 'down-cycling' and 'up-cycling' post-consumer content for practical applications in the green products ecosphere. Yes, I work in marketing, too. Delete per WP:NEO. With fire. Dennis Brown (talk) 23:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Delete Neologism at best. Jaque Hammer (talk) 20:34, 20 April 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.