Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stignorance

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 redirect to Opening Doors to Recovery. I've left the page history intact in case anyone's interested in merging. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stignorance

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

A non-notable Neologism that has no indication of any sort of widespread use. It appears the have been coined and used only by the group discussed in this article. The PROD was removed by the page creator without comment. Rorshacma (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - textbook case of WP:NEO. -- Whpq (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Whpq. No RSs at all. or merge per Cnilep. -- Quiddity (talk) 00:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Opening Doors to Recovery, which I have just this minute created. I found a couple of news sources and some funder press releases on the project, but nothing specifically on 'stignorance'. Cnilep (talk) 04:39, 27 August 2012 (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.