Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sociomarketing

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. Tone 22:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sociomarketing[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches find no indication that this neologism is in general enough use to qualify for an article; in fact, it seems to be a proprietary term, having been trademarked by Joel Goldstein. Instances that Google turns up are associated with him, even the Urban Dictionary link which is the only reference in this version. The article has been repeatedly posted by SPA user Sociomarketing (talk · contribs) who is probably the term's creator. Per WP:NEO: "Articles on neologisms are commonly deleted, as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term", and that seems to be the case here.

The article has been speedied, PRODded, re-speedied, and deleted a total of three times. I think it is time to bring it here for a definitive verdict, and probably to salt it. Wikipedia is not for promotion of proprietary terms. JohnCD (talk) 18:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt per the reasons outlined by the nominator. Block user as well. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:08, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and block Sociomarketing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for repeatedly introducing this bogus article, for which Urban Dictionary is the only available reference. Chester Markel (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, salt and block, per nom. Feezo (Talk) 19:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete per WP:SOAP by an SPA that just doesn't seem to get it (despite the history, it still doesn't seem to meet any CSD criteria). And get out the Morton, while you're at it. Erpert (let's talk about it) 23:14, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Also salt, a little pepper and a smidgen of garlic. This term fails WP:NEO at least, and appears per this: Joel Goldstein is a keynote speaker who coined the term Sociomarketing to be a promotional term. It would look more comfortable (though not on WP) as "Sociomarketing™"Tonywalton ^Talk 01:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and WP:SALT, as neologism, not notable. Chzz ► 05:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.