747:
self-promotion and the word not widespread in the scientific literature. But so was Nobel
Laureate Paul Crutzen's unfamiliar neologism in 2000 for naming the present era the 'Anthropocene' as being more appropriate than the relatively stable 'Holocene' era (the change still being officially considered by the Geological Society in London). I do not agree with one of the suggestions in Knowledge that sustainable development would be more suitable, since this implies the economic and population growth which are inimical to the proposed 'Sustainocene' era which has to do with the (improbable) survival of our own and many other species into the next century. Your artificial photosynthesis is entirely in keeping with James Hudson's declaration that we must move from a carbon economy to a photon economy and this is supported by Dan Nocera and yourself, for scientific, not self-promotional reasons. I think the word 'Sustainocne' should be made sustainable to alert all and sundry to the crisis we face. I'm virtually computer illiterate, so can you please show me what buttons to press to communicate with the Knowledge entry decision-makers. Kindest regards to you all Bryan Furnass. Tom Faunce.
754:@Bryan, (A) You have falsely assumed that each-and-every theory of sustainable development necessarily includes ongoing economic and population growth. That's false and our article on the subject probably needs to explore that notion more than it does. But already, the article talks of only using resources at no more than the rate of replenishment, which implies a steady (or falling) population and a steady-state economy. (B) The neologism "anthropocene" was also challenged here until a significant number of diverse RSs were mentioning it. Your word might fly on the wings of wikipedia. Just not yet. We're here to report after you've convinced lots of others, not to recruit them for you.
384:
I would love to read an article about the
Sustainocene because I think it is a valuable concept. However, none of the references I could find to it were in reliable sources independent from the initiators of the concept. When it has been the subject of major magazine/journal articles, or as a subject
746:
I am posting this message on behalf of Bryan
Furnass: "Dear Tom. I propose to mount a defence of continued inclusion, not deletion, of my neologism 'Sustainocene' in Knowledge, but I cannot find a way to do so through the Knowledge website. The first entry supporting deletion was that this was for
709:
that we shouldn't be used as a platform to foster the popularity of terms. If the word had never appeared in the professional literature, I would probably agree with you. But it did pass its review process and got published, so I don't see a big abuse-of-process problem using a redirect on the
410:), i have no general opinion on a deletion of the page. However, my main interest is to have an article which covers the supposed "Post carbon world", eg. a sustainable world which adapts and mitigates in face of global warming and environmental destruction. In relation to the current
329:
Please read the header part of my ANI report, a quick way is to look up his paper and slide (linked over there). The name was coined by Brian
Furnass, and Nocera/Faunce hijacked the term to promote their opinion how a sustainable world could be accomplished.
670:, with the first paper by B. Furnass, who coined the term. There is at least 1 book on Amazon on the subject (dind't looked into the particular content). But the term got "hi-jacked" very early by the AP fuel guys (and the 1 project heavily promoted
311:"Sustainocene" is a word made up by two researchers. If you can find a wider usage stemming from their coining of the term then it has some merit. Otherwise, we should have been rid of this and NimbusWeb's semi-transparent soapboxing for years.—
674:), except for Faunce who still promotes his research. Further it appears that Furnass had a false impression about the technology and the motives of Faunce & Co., when responding to a question at the end of a podcast (
278:
Where do you think I found it? Being on ANI does not prevent this page from being deleted for being a massive puff piece on a word that the author made up in academia and is trying to use
Knowledge as a venue for further
168:
344:
All I've gathered is that Faunce (NimbusWeb) is using this page, and others to promote his idealogy and research on
Knowledge, so we could probably be without this neologism that no one uses.—
459:
199:
The entirety of the article just reads as a promotional work regarding the research of Bryan
Furnass and Thomas Faunce on this neologism that only these people seem to use. In the
532:
121:
162:
552:
297:
I see no reason why this article shouldn't be kept(without the current bias), or alternatively an article is required to cover the topic of "post carbon world".
385:
in somebody else's book, then it could be added to
Knowledge. If those already exist, please post references to them so we can evaluate them. Thank you.
128:
667:
455:
94:
89:
232:
98:
17:
640:
This isn't a valid search term to turn this into a redirect. No one uses "Sustainocene" other than the author of the article.—
436:
rather than voice your personal opinions on the possible future merits of this term devoid of NimbusWeb/Faunce's distortion.—
183:
81:
150:
56:
462:. Often different terms are used to outline a post carbon world, many reports assess adaptation options, such as the
759:
715:
236:
504:
Ok, maybe i create that article later when i have enough data. Btw, thanks for your afford to help sort this out.
782:
40:
261:
144:
733:
702:
619:
576:
467:
391:
51:
671:
406:
Though besides wasting a few hours in the afford to make the scope sound (For reference see my final edit
140:
778:
763:
755:
738:
719:
711:
687:
683:
653:
635:
606:
602:
588:
564:
544:
513:
509:
497:
479:
475:
449:
427:
423:
396:
357:
339:
335:
324:
306:
302:
292:
273:
269:
252:
216:
63:
60:
36:
239:. So on top of everything, we have a major conflict of interest on this and several other articles.—
190:
706:
226:
176:
729:
387:
200:
418:
ocene describes the notion of sustainability, it's a good name for this possible future epoch.
647:
584:
560:
540:
491:
443:
351:
318:
286:
246:
210:
85:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
777:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
679:
631:
598:
505:
471:
419:
331:
298:
265:
675:
156:
222:
641:
623:
580:
556:
536:
485:
437:
411:
345:
312:
280:
240:
204:
77:
69:
115:
627:
433:
454:
Yes, I'm confident that the topic meets notability guidelines, see the term at
463:
705:; @Ryulong, your argument appears to be based on the reasonable concern in
466:
or various UN reports on sustainability. A broad principle can be found at
484:
Perhaps "post-carbon world" is a notable term. "Sustainocene" is not.—
260:
There is currently a ANI discussion about the scope of the article,
678:), and said that he knows nothing about artificial photosynthesis.
203:
where Faunce is not a major author, "Sustainocene" is used once. —
771:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
727:
Cancelled my Delete above. I see no problem with a redirect.
460:
Power Down: Options and
Actions for a Post-Carbon World
407:
111:
107:
103:
579:. Schreiber bike described the situation pretty well.
175:
237:this photo he uploaded to the Commons in the past
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
785:). No further edits should be made to this page.
533:list of Environment-related deletion discussions
221:I would also like to note that primary author
553:list of Politics-related deletion discussions
189:
8:
551:Note: This debate has been included in the
531:Note: This debate has been included in the
235:) is in fact Thomas Faunce, as evidenced by
550:
530:
458:] on "post carbon world" or this article
7:
434:notability guidelines and policies
24:
668:there are 11 Google Scholar cites
597:That would be a good compromise.
432:You should really read up on our
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
456:Google scholar has 480 entries
1:
802:
764:11:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
739:23:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
720:23:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
688:17:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
654:17:05, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
636:15:55, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
607:16:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
589:02:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
565:01:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
545:01:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
514:23:26, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
498:23:19, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
480:23:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
450:23:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
428:22:48, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
397:22:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
358:22:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
340:22:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
325:22:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
307:22:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
293:22:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
274:22:08, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
253:22:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
217:22:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
64:03:39, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
774:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
703:sustainable development
620:sustainable development
577:sustainable development
468:Sustainable development
52:sustainable development
672:has been abandoned
48:The result was
567:
547:
57:non-admin closure
793:
776:
756:NewsAndEventsGuy
737:
736:
712:NewsAndEventsGuy
650:
644:
494:
488:
446:
440:
404:No final opinion
395:
394:
354:
348:
321:
315:
289:
283:
249:
243:
213:
207:
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
34:
801:
800:
796:
795:
794:
792:
791:
790:
789:
783:deletion review
772:
732:
728:
648:
642:
492:
486:
464:IPCC AR5 report
444:
438:
390:
386:
352:
346:
319:
313:
287:
281:
247:
241:
211:
205:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
799:
797:
788:
787:
768:
767:
766:
749:
748:
741:
722:
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
659:
658:
657:
656:
612:
611:
610:
609:
592:
591:
569:
568:
548:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
400:
399:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
798:
786:
784:
780:
775:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
752:
751:
750:
745:
742:
740:
735:
731:
730:SchreiberBike
726:
723:
721:
717:
713:
708:
704:
700:
697:
696:
689:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
655:
651:
645:
639:
638:
637:
633:
629:
625:
621:
617:
614:
613:
608:
604:
600:
596:
595:
594:
593:
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
571:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
549:
546:
542:
538:
534:
529:
528:
515:
511:
507:
503:
502:
501:
500:
499:
495:
489:
483:
482:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
452:
451:
447:
441:
435:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
402:
401:
398:
393:
389:
388:SchreiberBike
383:
380:
379:
375:
374:
359:
355:
349:
343:
342:
341:
337:
333:
328:
327:
326:
322:
316:
310:
309:
308:
304:
300:
296:
295:
294:
290:
284:
277:
276:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
250:
244:
238:
234:
231:
228:
224:
219:
218:
214:
208:
202:
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
58:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
773:
770:
743:
724:
707:WP:NEOLOGISM
698:
615:
572:
415:
412:Anthropocene
403:
381:
377:
376:
229:
220:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
78:Sustainocene
70:Sustainocene
61:NorthAmerica
50:redirect to
49:
47:
31:
28:
680:prokaryotes
599:prokaryotes
506:Prokaryotes
472:Prokaryotes
420:Prokaryotes
414:, the name
332:Prokaryotes
299:Prokaryotes
266:Prokaryotes
201:only source
163:free images
779:talk page
573:Re-direct
557:• Gene93k
537:• Gene93k
279:thought.—
223:NimbusWeb
37:talk page
781:or in a
725:Redirect
699:Redirect
616:Redirect
382:too soon
262:see here
233:contribs
122:View log
39:or in a
643:Ryūlóng
624:Orser67
581:Orser67
487:Ryūlóng
439:Ryūlóng
416:Sustain
347:Ryūlóng
314:Ryūlóng
282:Ryūlóng
242:Ryūlóng
206:Ryūlóng
169:WP refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
744:Retain
710:term.
666:Well,
628:Beagel
378:Delete
141:Google
99:delete
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
760:talk
734:talk
716:talk
684:talk
676:link
632:talk
622:per
603:talk
585:talk
561:talk
541:talk
510:talk
476:talk
424:talk
408:here
392:talk
336:talk
303:talk
270:talk
227:talk
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
701:to
618:to
575:to
191:TWL
120:– (
55:. (
762:)
718:)
686:)
652:)
649:琉竜
634:)
626:.
605:)
587:)
563:)
555:.
543:)
535:.
512:)
496:)
493:琉竜
478:)
470:.
448:)
445:琉竜
426:)
356:)
353:琉竜
338:)
323:)
320:琉竜
305:)
291:)
288:琉竜
272:)
264:.
251:)
248:琉竜
215:)
212:琉竜
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
59:)
758:(
714:(
682:(
646:(
630:(
601:(
583:(
559:(
539:(
508:(
490:(
474:(
442:(
422:(
350:(
334:(
317:(
301:(
285:(
268:(
245:(
230:·
225:(
209:(
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.