Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7 c of communication


 * 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 Effective Public Relations--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 05:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

7 c of communication

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable essay (with email address for some reason); contested prod. Judging from the creator's edit summary as well as his/her other contributions, it appears that s/he doesn't quite understand what Wikipedia is all about. Erpert (let's talk about it) 20:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete the topic seems to barely exist outside Wikipedia, so the idea isn't notable. Hut 8.5 21:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And what's more, the only two hits in Google Books for the term give different lists of Cs, and this article is different again. Hut 8.5 21:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * :: comment: Dear Hut 8.5 I think google books has a few more if you change the title a bit. Here are a few more: . Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC))


 * comment: moved to 7 c's of communication as this seems the more normal title. Seems quite a common list taught/mentioned in lots of business things. I can't find the originator of the list yet. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 22:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC))


 * Delete Content-wise, this article seems to be an essay. Looking for significant coverage of this in reliable sources, I was unable to find any. I did a google search of the first source listed, A Complete Course in ISC Commerce, and was unable to find anything about the "7 C's" there. The second source listed does mention them, but briefly. Fails WP:GNG.  Jujutacular  T · C 02:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * comment: Dear Jujutacular I think the brief mention in the first source is here: (Msrasnw (talk) 21:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC))


 * Delete as unencyclopedic content, being an essay. Whether or not the topic is notable, the article would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, which is grounds for deletion without prejudice against recreation. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, appears to be just a poorly referenced original theory. See WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:NOTHOWTO, etc.  If this is in fact an existing theory, then as Jujutacular notes it's not a notable one.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 06:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Must Keep: This contains an important part of our syllabus and wiki or any other side doesnot proivide this. so i would strongly recommend it should be kept. (talk)
 * "Our" syllabus? You really don't know how Wikipedia works, do you? Please consider reading WP:NOTBLOG. (By the way, writing your comment in a larger font doesn't necessarily help you get your point across.) Erpert (let's talk about it) 17:29, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment: I think this : might be better than the one above for finding the sources. (Msrasnw (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC))

Keep: In my view a notable topic that has some problems with current version - that just need some work. Tagged for rescue. The earlier title did not produce as many results on the search as the current one. (adding effective to make 7 c's of effective communication seems to add more too). The orgin of this seems to be "Effective public relations: pathways to public favor" by Scott M. Cutlip, Allen H. Center published in 1952 by Prentice-Hall. It is now in its 10th edition or so. (Msrasnw (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC))
 * AFD Tip: Familiarize yourself with WP:AADD. And next time, please don't use WP:USEFUL in your !votes. RussianReversal (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What does this refer to? (Msrasnw (talk) 22:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC))


 * Merge to Effective Public Relations. Unless you can find other books besides this notable bestselling highly acclaimed textbook, which uses it.   D r e a m Focus  20:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Some References
 * Scott M. Cutlip, Allen H. Center (1952) Effective public relations: pathways to public favor
 * Maheshwari, R. P. (1997) A Complete Course in ISC Commerce‎
 * Aggarwal, Vir Bala and V. S. Gupta (2001) Handbook of Journalism and Mass Communication
 * Murphy, H.A. et. al., (2000) “Effective Business Communication” 7th Edn, McGraw-Hill, NY (SIE)Tata McGraw-Hill, ISBN: 0070187754 EAN:9780070187757
 * Gysbers, Norman C. and Earl J. Moore (1981) Improving guidance programs, Prentice-Hall, 1981 ISBN 0134526562, 9780134526560
 * Mentions as topic on courses
 * http://www.cob.sjsu.edu/easter_m/bus200w/200w%20fall%2007%20syllabus.htm#The_7_C’s_of_Communication Easter, Dr. Marilyn. San Jose State University, Managerial Communication BuS200w
 * http://www.pu.edu.pk/course/course-description.asp?course%20id=12501-s1-5
 * http://www.nagarjunauniversity.ac.in/syllabus.asp?paperid=Pgdttm2&id=90
 * (Msrasnw (talk) 21:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC))
 * So other authors are now referencing their 7 C's? If more than one notable source uses it, then it deserves its own article and should be kept.   D r e a m Focus  23:03, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge to the article on the book, Effective Public Relations. Or merge the book article to here. The end result would be one article on the subject. --Stormbay (talk) 21:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per WP:N, WP:ESSAY, and WP:OR.   talk 17:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I have removed the essay style comments and left it just as a referenced factual statement of Cutlip and Center's work. (Msrasnw (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC))
 * That section would merge nicely into Effective Public Relations where the points are just listed. --Stormbay (talk) 23:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Agree with the above that we should reconfigure the article to cover the book, Effective Public Relations.-- Pink Bull  05:03, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.