Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marketing decision support systems

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. The Wordsmith^Communicate 04:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing decision support systems

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

Sounds like a neologism. I'm also concerned that the text seems somewhat lifted from the cited paper (which is not freely available). Raymie Humbert (t • c) 18:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - a quick check on google scholar reveals dozens of papers about marketing decision support systems. Obviously a well-established field that dates back at least to the 1970s and seems to be widely used in many industries (google scholar results include assessments of use for service firms, product launches, and tourism). TheGrappler (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Jezhotwells (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- Jezhotwells (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Original nominator did not complete the nomination. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Jezhotwells (talk) 23:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Seems to be a notable topic. In addition to the one paper cited ([1]), see [2]; [3]; [4]. I deleted one section pimping one particular MKDSS product; I wouldn't object to a section with a list of such products, as opposed to a promo blurb for one. Also, the article at present consists substantially of a discussion of graphics that have been deleted for copyright reasons. Someone knowledgeable of the subject matter should edit this to make it less meaningless. TJRC (talk) 01:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nomination sounds like guesswork. Please see WP:BEFORE and the search links above. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Meaninglessly vague and tautological text:

Marketing decision support systems help companies to make decisions and guide actions across all aspects of the marketing function including new product development, branding, communications and sales support

that's meant to sell you on the idea that a "marketing decision support system" is something you need:

The reason for using an MKDSS is because it helps to support the software vendors’ planning strategy for marketing products; it can help to identify advantageous levels of pricing, advertising spending, and advertising copy for the firm’s products.

Seems also to contain elements of how-to guide:

a low-level meta-model of the process was constructed for the data flows. This lists the steps of the process in boxes and the arrows refer to data flows. The previous figure shows the actual application of the first step of modeling the market response structure for a particular business. There are other ways that this step could have been done, just like many different sub-models could be used for different calculations. The arrow going from the create recommendations to the gather information is used when there was not enough information available before to come to sufficient recommendations.

This one will definitely send you to the medicine cabinet for a headache powder. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The existing lead was a reasonable start but did not do enough to emphasise the essential features of modelling and prediction. I have provided another lead, based upon a comprehensive source. Colonel Warden (talk) 16:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The last two paragraphs are an ungodly meaningless mess, though, now that the accompanying figures have been removed. Unless someone takes a scalpel to it soon, I'll be bold and use my axe. TJRC (talk) 17:49, 20 August 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.