Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advertising 2.0


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 02:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Advertising 2.0


Bump from prod. The article may be original research-y right now, but I believe there should be an article (or section in Web 2.0) on this topic, given the amount of attention the media and business communitee are giving it. —Quarl (talk) 2006-11-22 07:00Z 
 * Delete. Original research. Concept must have been invented fairly recently considering that the article says it emerged in late 2006...... --- RockMFR 07:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete 2.0 per 2.0 above 2.0. We'll let this neologism mature a bit before writing a sourced and verifiable article about it. MER-C 07:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete spam 2.0, non-notable 2.0, neologism 2.0. no reliable sources 2.0.  Original research 2.0.  Annoying v99.53.  Xtifr tälk 11:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per my own nomination to begin with. I don't know why you removed my prod tag. It was a clear cut case and there was even an additional supporter of the prod. MartinDK 12:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete YAWN- Yet Another Web Neologism Lurker  oi!  16:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the entire 2.0 fad as non-notable neologism riding on the coattails of Web 2.0. adding ~ism on the end of each noun or person's name is bad enough. then people started copying Steve Jobs by putting i-~ in front of everything, but at least those are mainly brand names. Nuke the lot. Ohconfucius 07:06, 23 November 2006 (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.