Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enterprise search 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   delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Enterprise search marketing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article doesn't make much sense. I still don't know what enterprise search marketing is supposed to be after reading this. It is also basically an orphan and don't have any references. Not even sure that "Enterprise search marketing" is a valid term. Runarb (talk) 14:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No published sources to verify that such a concept exists. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 19:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Merge Into Search engine marketing as this is an emerging field, see Google Analytics Premium @SmithAndTeam (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you have any third party sources to verify that such a concept as "Enterprise Search Marketing" exists? I can't find anything relevant on Google, but maybe it's just that I don't know exactly what to look for... The only real reference I have found so fare it this . That do mention the term in the heading, but don’t explain what Enterprise Search Marketing is supposed to be. Runarb (talk) 09:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Here: Neo@Ogilvy is a digital advertising agency that was acquired by Ogilvy & Mather. Since they call it Enterprise Search Marketing, that is enough for now, as the term will emerge over the next few years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smithandteam (talk • contribs) 01:04, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: No evidence of meeting WP:GNG criteria for reliable secondary-source coverage, and none could be found. That the term "will emerge over the next few years" is not a reason for inclusion now per WP:CRYSTAL. The inclusion of the term on the websites of a smattering of marketing agencies is not sufficient coverage in secondary sources; these are primary sources, since they're companies offering the service. --Batard0 (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: If ther term is a notable one then there should be some coverage in reliable secondary sources. Without at least one of these, there doesn't seem to be any justification for this page. Fireflo (talk) 11:08, 19 October 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.