Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interactive big bang

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, consensus is that it is a non notable neologism. Davewild (talk) 11:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Interactive big bang

Interactive big bang (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable neologism. No relevant results on Google. Prod removed by author. — Matt Eason (Talk • Contribs) 18:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete as non-notable neologism. No sources cited, and the combination of "interactive big bang" and "interactive ripples" receives zero Google hits. EALacey (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - Original research that is unlikely to undergo or unable to undergo a fundamental rewrite. WP:NEO and WP:V issues prevail. Wisdom89 (T / C) 20:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as OR neologism. I'm not sure if it's even putting across any particular idea clearly apart from "interactivity in ads is good". -- Mithent (talk) 20:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable, OR neologism. Possibly intended to promote and direct traffic to the linked web site.--Boson (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Relates to the oft-deleted Interactive Ripples. This company is starting to annoy me. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, "Interactive Big bang is an online advertising practice which refers to optimum utilization of the available online marketing tools to capture the click of the visitors in order to make a brand visible and available in the online space", almost speedyable as incomprehensible nonsense! Seriously though, WP:NEO would seem to apply here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lankiveil (talk • contribs) 02:20, 23 March 2008 (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.