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. MBisanz ^talk 01:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BioCognetics[edit]

An article purporting to concern a "protologism", but really has to do with the work of Terrence Webster-Doyle. The word (trademarked) is found nowhere but on Wikipedia and in the writings of its creator and his websites. Fails WP:RS, WP:N and runs counter to WP:NEO. Victoriagirl (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per the nom this is is a non-notable neologism which appears only to be used only by Dr. Webster-Doyle. Nancy ^talk 11:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Gnews and Gbook searches show zero hits. Non notable per nom. Tassedethe (talk)

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.