Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Independent Traveler


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:25, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Free Independent Traveler

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article has existed for close to three years with only one attempt at a citation (that link is now dead). A Google search for "Free Independent Traveler" initially yields either Wikipedia pages or what I'll call "Fakepedia" pages (i.e. sites that simply copy Wikipedia pages). A bit more digging offers a few other links mentioning the phenomenon, but one of the links (from acronymfinder.com) notes that "This definition appears very rarely" for the relevant acronym.

There have been some attempts by governments to attract the sort of business that this article describes, but the term does to appear (particularly in a capitalized state) to be in more than passing use in most cases, and as far as I can tell there is no movement to self-identify with the term.

In short, as it is written now the article does not seem to refer to a significant phenomenon. The article has had approximately 30 months for improvement, and as such I believe that it is a good candidate for pruning. Tyrenon (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete or Redirect per nom. Yutsi Talk/  Contributions  15:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 18:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete seems like an attempt at a neologism, possibly from an obscure book on marketing. Gigs (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete something between an ESSAY, a DICDEF, and a marketing term popular in the travel industry a few years back. It's real enough - people tend to book their own hotels and flights rather than buying packages - but not convinced the name is worth much. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - This thing had me scratching my head over potential copyvio, there is a real cut-and-paste feel to this, but a Google check for a phrase only returned a wave of mirrors. Still, this one doesn't smell right. Outside of that we've got an essentially unsourced piece about a neologism that is undoubtedly a fork. Carrite (talk) 05:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does feel copied, most likely from a travel company's Intranet. Most likely, we'll never know. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Snowball delete as dicdef, neologism, etc. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. I've been working on a software package for the tourism industry and I keep hearing my clients throw around the term FIT.  Until I found this article I did not know what it meant or what it stood for.  It seems to be widespread enough that even in non-english speaking countries (I'm in Israel) tour operators use the term. Joe407 (talk) 14:44, 19 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.