Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solution 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; userfication upon request. Mojo Hand (talk) 04:29, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Solution Marketing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This essay is essentially the same idea as Solution selling. WI have my doubts about that one also, but we certainly don't need this in addition. I have no idea which is the better term--they both seem to me like almost impenetrable jargon.  DGG ( talk ) 06:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as mentioned as I see no further improvements to this if it's symmetrical to solution selling (one word difference, frankly). Notifying taggers, and .  SwisterTwister   talk  07:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as per . Ueutyi (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete.  This is not a dictionary and the whole piece seems to just be interested in defining the term- and it does that in a overly-verbose manner(no offense intended). 331dot (talk) 12:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * First of all, please don't always talking about delete, this could also be consider as personal bias. Secondly, there's a big difference between solution marketing and solution selling, solution marketing is business to mass business, and a step before solution selling, after the business receive our message about what value we offer then comes solution selling. I would say both topic is important in today's business, since you can see more and more company they are offering solution, if you can't get the awareness or attention from your target customer by doing solution marketing, how could a business sell their solution.Third, I want to thank you to letting me know about your concern that the content of solution marketing is similar to solution selling. Please give me more opinions, I really appreciate for your opinion, with these I can improve the solution marketing page to be a valuable page. Thank you! Please don't delete it at this moment, and please give me more input, I will improve this page. Thank you very much! Athina martinez (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do not confuse 'personal bias' with simple opinions as to whether or not a page exists. I would add that Wikipedia is not a business how-to guide or dictionary; it is for subjects that have independent reliable sources that indicate how the subject is notable.  The article reads like it is simply defining the term and doesn't indicate to me how it is notable.  It also uses jargon very specific and detailed for the business world, which makes it hard for non-businesspeople to read and understand it. 331dot (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Taking for granted that solution marketing and solution selling are different, could they be combined to be covered in a single article? To me the biggest issue with this article is that the tone is that of a business school student essay. That's not a reflection of quality, but in that it seems written for a teacher/other classmates rather than for a general audience, and seems intent to persuade rather than to explain. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 15:22, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per --allthefoxes (Talk)  15:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of the above, but with no objection to Userfying. that would involve the article being moved to, for example, User:Athina martinez/Solution marketing where you could continue to solicit feedback and make improvements before eventually moving it back to be an article again. If that's something you would like, since it's looking like the alternative is deletion, you should say so explicitly. If you go that route, I'd strongly recommend taking the feedback here into consideration and even soliciting more feedback from participants in this discussion (and even asking one of us or some other experienced editor to be the one to move it back into the article space). &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 15:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Would second a Userfying --allthefoxes (Talk) 15:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No objection to Userfying. There seems like at least a chance this could be a decent article, but not in its current form(and I think there would need to be a fresh start) 331dot (talk) 15:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Athina martinez is posting to this page's talk page; I'm not sure they realize that this is the actual discussion. 331dot (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2016 (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.