Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OMarketing

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. Mailer Diablo 08:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OMarketing

Neologism. So new that the article previously claimed that the term was coined in June 2006, by none other than PJ Conley, which happens to be the name of our friend the author, who has no other contributions and may or may not be affiliated with OMarketing the non-notable consulting firm. It's like a resume for a deleted-article application. Opabinia regalis 02:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete vain vanity in vain. Danny Lilithborne 02:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Hope Mr. Conley enjoys his move from Buffalo to the UK. JChap (Talk) 02:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per nom -- vanity neologism -- Alias Flood 03:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• oDelete, as attempted marketing of a marketing concept. NawlinWiki 03:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• ODelete with Oextreme Oprejudice should have just been proded. Pascal.Tesson 04:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• ODelete Oas Oper Oabove. Dionyseus 05:10, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• ODelete Oper Onom Michael 06:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. — Deckiller 06:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• ODelete In the real world, this is just called... Marketing. --DarkAudit 14:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Zos 19:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: vanity entry. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 23:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity. Hoxxy 12:19, 18 July 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.