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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:41, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noocenosis[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)

This looks like a term used by a certain Russian academic group, and little known elsewhere. The article was likely created for self-promotion by a person connected to that group. A corresponding page in Russian Wikipedia, ru:Нооценоз, was deleted with reasons given as “no proof of notability” and “advertising”. Brinerat (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Maybe it would be helpful to ask for input at WikiProject Ecology? The dense technical language and Russian references make this a hard one for the average Wikipedian to make a judgement about. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A search of Web of Science for "Noocenosis OR noocenose OR noocoenosis" as topic yields no publications. Clearly not notable. Athel cb (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a classic failure of WP:N. jps (talk) 16:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article itself says that this term is only used in "post-Soviet countries", and it smells like a post-Soviet Lysenkoism. Hyperion35 (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2021 (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.