Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travel 2.0


 * 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   no consensus to delete. AfD is not the venue to discuss a merger or move of perfectly notable material, but it was done, so that's it. The discussion has gone on for over two weeks, without any consensus to delete this material from the encyclopedia. Whoever wants to be bold can move or merge the material, without further discussion as far as I'm concerned. Bearian (talk) 17:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Travel 2.0

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This term doesn't seem to have caught on as a concept the way, say, "Enterprise 2.0" has. Yes, there are a few references that use the term "Travel 2.0", but that's to be expected - the same as you can find phrases like "Comedy 2.0" or "Food 2.0" or "Shopping 2.0", etc. "Travel 2.0" seems to mean nothing more than websites for travelers, plus perhaps technologies like GPS. The vague, essay-like text currently in the article I think is further proof that there's no real body of thinking behind this term. Yaron K. (talk) 23:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has been renamed to Travel in the internet age. Northamerica1000(talk) 06:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NEO. Andrew327 13:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: Looks fairly decent article at first glance. NSlights (talk) 06:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 01:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep but possibly rename. The subject of tourism in the age of Web 2.0 content, social networks, online review sites, etc, has received a lot of coverage, even if the name Travel 2.0 doesn't have as much usage. Wikipedia articles are about concepts, not (usually) names. It doesn't overlap with the sections on recent developments or latest trends in Tourism, so this is non-duplicative coverage of a big topic that is significant in business terms (tourism is one of the world's biggest industries). --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:15, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Uncertain as to the present title (maybe Travel in the internet age would be better?), but the subject covered is manifestly notable. Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:00, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - it looks like you moved "Travel 2.0" to "Travel in the internet age". I agree that that's a better name, in that it doesn't claim that its title is a notable term - but for what it's worth, there's already the article travel website, that holds (or can hold) all the relevant information about the ways people can use the web for booking/reviews/etc. One could argue that there should be a merge of this article to "travel website" (or something similar), but personally, I still think deletion is the way to go. Looking over the "Travel 2.0"/"Travel in the internet age" article, I see exactly one sentence that's encyclopedic and worth keeping: "Roughly two-thirds of Americans research and plan travel online and approximately the same amount book online as well." All the rest just reads like a meandering essay to me. Yaron K. (talk) 03:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * A merge/ redirect is probably worth considering. The article does seem to be a little heavy on the advocacy for a neologism. As long as the subject matter is covered appropriately I don't have a problem with how it's titled. I still oppose deletion. I don't think the history should be lost. It's worth at least noting the terminology and maybe the bit you note wherever "travel in the internet age" is covered. Candleabracadabra (talk) 04:13, 9 July 2013 (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.