Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Social Media Avoidance

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. kelapstick(bainuu) 04:15, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Social Media Avoidance


I wasn't able to find any sources for the term "social media avoidance" through News, Books, or Scholar. SMA seems like a non-notable neologism created by an editor who doesn't seem to get the point of wikipedia. There doesn't seem to be any potential in this draft for improvement (and the sexist drafter doesn't seem like they want to hear criticism anyway). Honestly, if this were notable, it might be best to wait a few years. The amount of WP:OR in this draft article leaves nothing to be salvaged. &mdash; kikichugirl  oh hello! 21:41, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think the topic of social media avoidance could possibly merit its own article if adequate sourcing existed. (More on that later.) However, this current draft would require a complete ground-up rewrite to meet the notability and no original research requirements. While it is ordinarily preferable to improve a draft, the author in this case appears unwilling to implement any of the changes suggested by four reviewers, and has indeed reacted critically to reviews.


 * I think WP:TNT applies. For one thing, none of the cited sources directly/explicitly refer to "social media avoidance", raising neologism notability issues. Further, large portions of the draft engage in prohibited original research and synthesis. For example, the content in the "Reasons for SMA" and "Examples of SMA" sections is speculative; the sources don't actually say that "social media avoidance" is the reason for these companies' particular behaviours. Elsewhere, data from Facebook and Google Trends is cited, but conclusions about SMA are again wrongly synthesized. All of these sections would need to be completely rewritten and entirely new references found.


 * I have done a brief reference search and have not found anything substantial from a reliable source on Google Books, JSTOR or Highbeam relating to "social media avoidance" itself. /wia 🎄 /tlk  22:29, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Too many troubles for an acceptable article yet. SwisterTwister   talk  07:24, 20 December 2015 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.