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 keep. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:16, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I-Space

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable classification of knowledge. Not sure whether it's closer to self-promotion or a dic-def, in both cases not encyclopedic. Appears to fail GNG. — JFG ^talk 15:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There seems to be a certain amount of uptake of the term in the scientific literature; the stuff in "Further reading" could all be drafted in as references, and would shore it up sufficiently. Already has enough substance to get it past the dictdef barrier, too. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:16, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Elmidae. wumbolo ^^^ 07:57, 7 September 2018 (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.