Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commercial friending


 * 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 Speedy deleted. G12 copyvio of http://www.friending.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=1&Itemid=5. Dpmuk (talk) 23:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Commercial friending

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Pure original and synthesised research. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Original research and patent nonsense: Commercial Friending ideas started to develop based on a need to differentiate marketing instruments and marketing solutions according to the criteria of the communication participants’ interaction. Conventional advertising results to be less effective, future belongs to direct advertising. Therefore advertising processes are to be improved. 2000s is the time of Friending worldwide expansion. Interactive technologies contribute to marketing communications development. Commercial Friending aims to break one-way communication finding solutions to identify communication participants’ status, figure out whether partners are ready to accept information. Friending concept also serves as a standard in communication. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This is also almost literally a word-for-word repost of content that was previously discussed at Articles for deletion/Friending. It was unreferenced nonsense then — beggar robots? magazines that pay you to read them? Buddhist prayer wheels? interactive flooring? "objects implementing needs in communication with artificially enormous art-solutions"? — and it hasn't been improved a whit since then. The term "friending" has no meaning outside the specific context of social networking websites, and the listed examples fail to provide any properly cited evidence that there's any real world phenomenon of "friending" that has anything to do with public art installations or religious iconography or talking floor tiles or homemade robots or whatever. Put simply, the concept of "friending" does not exist in the context described here; rather, the editor seems to be promoting his own personal pet theory. Delete, possibly even speedy as a repost of deleted b*llsh*t. Bearcat (talk) 18:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest the AfD runs its course. Then future reposts can be speedied as reposts of AfD deleted 'stuff'. Nothing to stop a snowball, should that happen. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Update: This just got a whole lot more interesting. Check out this link, which more or less confirms that this is basically the quirky spitball theory of some Russian marketing communications group — in fact, the whole article is literally a straight copy-paste of their own statement of concept, right down to the ridiculous examples and the nonwiki formatting errors and the "IFC = IV+II+NS+IS+IN+ISS+IF" nonsense and the complete lack of any real reliable sources. So add WP:COPYVIO and WP:COI to the list of reasons why this article needs to be tossed in the trash. Bearcat (talk) 22:48, 29 February 2012 (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.