Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Article marketing


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 00:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Article marketing

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Lacked sufficient sources since 2008 and yet another of these crufty articles full of original research about online advertising. Unsure how this is really any different than what's covered in content marketing. Zim Zala Bim talk 03:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  04:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 06:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 06:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's no evidence that this term is in widespread enough use for the topic to be significantly covered in secondary sources.  It's not in any dictionary and searching in ebsco's databases and google scholar return nothing for the phrase.  FalconK (talk) 01:03, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.