Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marketing in schools


 * 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 of the debate was KEEP as rewritten by User:Meelar. &mdash; J I P | Talk 14:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Marketing in schools
*Delete. I don't see how a school having a motto constitutes marketing, or how it "distracts from a school's primary responsibility to its students". If there's a point to this alleged debate, the article fails to make it. TheMadBaron 07:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. The article has no encyclopaedic merit, contains only a loose definition and a small list of schools in the Victoria, Australia area. Remy B 06:52, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. There was a whole fuss in the media over here about this, but even so, the article currently there is not worth keeping. Saberwyn 07:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Crud, it's even got the wrong kind of marketing! The whole fuss I was thinking of was over a school posting a sign saying "Proudly Sponsored by *local* McDonald's". I think what's actually going on here is a bit of a whinge about how some private schools are more about making money through insane fees than education. Saberwyn 09:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I live in Melbourne, and I havent heard about any of this in the media, so it doesnt even seem to be a topical issue. Remy B 10:15, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am sure that an article could be made about marketing in schools or even about marketing of schools. However, this article fails to do either. I would be happy to keep a decent stub. Capitalistroadster 10:31, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Article would need to have a complete rewrite to be acceptable. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 11:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Fix, rather than delete. There is definitely enough for an article on this topic. The Land 19:49, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing that after this article is deleted. Equally, there's nothing that guarantees the article will be 'fixed' if it's kept. Keep as fixed. --Last Malthusian 22:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as title of article does not match the content, and the content is unencyclopedic per Remy B and Saberwyn. I am open to reconsidering my vote if the content is changed to discuss the promotion of commercial products in schools. --Metropolitan90 00:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten. --Metropolitan90 06:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for the first time today ;) Renata3 03:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep my rewrite--this is a clearly notable topic, with widespread public concern (especially on the political left; see e.g. this article in Adbusters). I've rewritten the article to be about the actual practice--it's still stubby, but will expand. Meelar (talk) 06:45, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valid subject, and reasonably well written although I am unsure of how neutral this can get. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:27, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten. TheMadBaron 09:16, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The original author has reverted Meelar's version, which I have restored, and created Marketing of schools as a distinct article. Confusing, this. The Land 10:22, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm very confused as to why another article (Marketing of schools) has been created when Marketing in schools is still be debated for deletion. I can't see any reason why the 'Marketing of schools' article shouldnt be marked for deletion as well, as I put that same text up for deletion when it was found in 'Marketing in schools'. If someone rewrites an article to save it from deletion, the last thing we want is for the unsuitable text to be dumped into a near-identically named article. Remy B 11:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I mainly did it to stop someone reverting the original article to the mis-named version again. Feel free to nominate Marketing of schools as well. Frankly I think there's space for both, though IMV marketing of schools is borderline while marketing in schools is a definite Keep. The Land 17:36, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep the copy at marketing of schools, but delete this one, as it is not about marketing in schools. A great article could be written about that topic, but this isn't it; it's about something else. An article about marketing in schools could cover, perhaps, schools getting textbooks, sports equipment, etc, with name brands all over/in them because the schools can't afford those things otherwise. It's a common phenomenon. --Jacquelyn Marie 04:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This article is continually being reverted from the rewritten version by the original author. Please note that the rewritten version was the one made by Meelar. Remy B 12:01, 26 October 2005 (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.