Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Consumerization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ecoleetage (talk | contribs) at 00:13, 30 June 2008 (Closing article as keep (non-admin closure)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 00:13, 30 June 2008 by Ecoleetage (talk | contribs) (Closing article as keep (non-admin closure))
- 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 Keep (non-admin closure), as per the consensus commentary. Ecoleetage (talk) 00:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Consumerization (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Neologism Madcoverboy (talk) 19:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete or rewrite/expand so that the article contains more than just a dictionary like definition since Wikipedia is not a dictionary. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 19:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Keep; the article has been greatly improved, and while not every word in the dictionary is notable, this one apparently is. Is it me or is it about to snow? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 01:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I can see that this has potential. I'd rather see it expanded than deleted.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I fully agree that the initial frame is weak, and needs expansion. I focussed effort on researching the appropriate references as the last time I started a wiki article it was deleted due to the fact that it had no references before I had time to complete it or insert references. Looks like I did it the wrong way round. I have also invited a number of the subject area exeprts namely Douglas Neal and ithers to expand the article. I am confident that the article can and will expand to something that will do the Wikipedia proud. User:Adrius42 —Preceding comment was added at 20:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The article's not great as is, but I'm with Paulmcdonald in seeing the potential. Vickser (talk) 01:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I learned something from it. Perhaps a better title could be sought, because it is not instantly obvious that the word consumerization refers to the fact that electronic technologies are often adopted by private users before being adopted by businesses. (And usually, the military adopts them before consumers, but that isn't what militarization chiefly means.) - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:22, 26 June 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.