Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transformation recruitment


 * 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. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Transformation recruitment

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Seems to be WP:ESSAY and WP:OR, lacking WP:RS. &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 13:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Good advice but not ready for the encyclopedia yet. Title seems to be a neologism and the material would be better covered in more general articles, on retraining maybe? Jaque Hammer (talk) 14:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't see how improving the skills of your workforce is 'recruitment'; it's always been called 'training' or 'retraining' up to now. I CAN see a reference to a particular 'recruitment' company which has adopted or originated this new bit of business jargon. I may be (am!) cynical, but I do wonder if 'transformation' costs more than 'training'..... Article is basically advising what is plain common sense - but that does seem to be lacking in many branches of business as they welter in bonuses and jargon, and wonder why they are losing money. (Told you I was cynical). Peridon (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. You don't understand at all.  You give your entirely ordinary and obvious method some kind of vague but glittery label, and a lucrative career as a consultant can be yours.  The trick is not to give away how obvious it is before you get their money. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Without diving into the subject of recruitment, it sounds like this may be better suited by adding a section to the recruitment wiki page. I agree with the assertions of WP:OR and lack of WP:RS. --Artlovesyou (talk) 05:30, 6 October 2010 (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.