Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abscription
the revert of speedy mentioned in the nomination seems perfectly reasonable to me. The article text does not promote any particular company, person or publication; it does not say "abscription is a fantastic new technique that will cure cancer and clone unicorns" or anything like it, and even if it did it would hardly meet the  barrier of {{tq|would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION.}}. Of course, it's still a single-primary-source topic, so it should be deleted, but not as a G11 speedy (and I do not see any other fitting CSD
— User:Tigraan, 13:22, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:G11 (Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion)