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. postdlf (talk) 19:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
This article seems to be a POV Fork of
Marketing. It was an advertising page created by a perma-blocked user. The phrase 'Transparent Marketing' is a neologism with little significant use.
Salimfadhley (
talk) 23:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 19:20, 26 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 01:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
delete as an act of
WP:TNT. This does appear to possibly be a real thing (e.g.
[1]) but the text we have is uselessly promotional.
Mangoe (
talk) 03:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete. Completely unsourced. Agreed, not a "thing".
Gm545 (
talk) 06:01, 2 January 2014 (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.
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. postdlf (talk) 19:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
This article seems to be a POV Fork of
Marketing. It was an advertising page created by a perma-blocked user. The phrase 'Transparent Marketing' is a neologism with little significant use.
Salimfadhley (
talk) 23:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 19:20, 26 December 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 01:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
delete as an act of
WP:TNT. This does appear to possibly be a real thing (e.g.
[1]) but the text we have is uselessly promotional.
Mangoe (
talk) 03:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete. Completely unsourced. Agreed, not a "thing".
Gm545 (
talk) 06:01, 2 January 2014 (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.