Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advertising literacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. DS 14:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Advertising literacy

Appears to violate WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:POV and WP:NEO, in addition to needing copyediting, WP:MOS problems, needs wikilinks, etc. What a mess! -- Bhuston 11:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per Bhuston. Tulkolahten 11:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete yup, original research and a neologism, I think that's correct. Might be salvageable if it weren't for the fact that the currency of the term is obviously very limited. Guy (Help!) 11:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - nn neologism, 548 ghits. MER-C 11:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Hi MER-C... To add to your argument for deletion: I also looked at ghits, and I think 548 may be exaggerated, due to some of the ghits referintg to another concept, that is, how media consumers can become critical listeners and viewers of advertising. In the context of the article however, "advertising lit" seems to refer to how well advertising techniques work in manipulating the public mind. --Bhuston 12:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Advertising is one of the drawbacks of literacy. This is a long, wordy article about somebody's marketing neologism. It is spam even if it is referenced, since its chief purpose is to promote someone's advertising or consulting business, and this sort of promotional activity gives rise to dubious research that can be claimed as "references". - Smerdis of Tlön 16:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, WP:OR, WP:NEO, lots of problems here, cannot be salvaged from keeping. Terence Ong 16:44, 5 December 2006 (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.