Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullet-point engineering Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bullet-point_engineering

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet-point engineering

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

Unreferenced neologism. Could not find a source via Google Books (except for Wikipedia reprints), Google Scholar, ACM, Oxford Reference. The only two substantive contributors were both blocked long ago. Pointillist (talk) 13:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All I could find was a self-published book of that title, with no description, and no coverage of any kind. All hits were indeed reprints of the WP article. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non-notable neologism, tagged as unreferenced since 2008, no significant RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 22:21, 30 April 2015 (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.