Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agency 2.0 (2nd nomination)

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. Chetblong^{T C} 05:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agency 2.0[edit]

First nomination was closed for lack of quorum, with only delete votes. This AfD should instead have been relisted. My initial nom read as follows: This is a neologism that was coined some two weeks ago. I initially tagged this one for speedy, but I had second thoughts. Still, Delete. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no evidence of WP:N and no WP:RS; article itself suggests it's WP:NEO/WP:CRYSTAL. JJL (talk) 02:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unsourced neologism. Don't know why it wasn't automatically re-listed for consensus rather than closed. Travellingcari (talk) 02:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete does not establish notability (insuff. independent references); new, unseasoned neologism. Also smells like a subtle marketing jab for Tri-Media Marketing Technologies, quote: "Becoming an 'agency 2.0' requires a typical advertising agency to move beyond standard offline media offerings and adapt the new technologies needed to address today’s media and Internet-savvy audience who demand faster, more personalized and even more relevant communications. . ." and so may be little more than clever WP:Spam --Pgagnon999 (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete Thinly veiled attempt at spamming Wikipedia using a new "industry buzzword". Wildthing61476 (talk) 14:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. As I read the opening sentence:

The term Agency 2.0 refers to the next generation of advertising and marketing agencies, and more specifically, to the new skill sets and business models that they must adopt in order to provide their clients with interactive marketing communications programs in today's more Internet savvy world.

I began to laugh out loud. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. and I don't understand why it was originally closed for "lack of quorom". Why wasn't just relisted like other afd's that don't get attention the first time around?--brew crewer (yada, yada) 17:02, 18 February 2008 (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.