Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premium (marketing)

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 Speedy close - Nomination "withdrawld", no votes to delete, non-admin closure.

Premium (marketing)

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

This article has no sources, seems to be OR or something, and just sticks a couple topics together that are loosely related. Empire3131 (talk) 03:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to WITHDRAWL my nomination due to improvements in the articles. It makes much more sense now. Wikify, sure, but not deletion. (Can someone close this with more knowledge then me on how to close things?)Empire3131 (talk) 00:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Empire3131! Season's Greetings! Thanks for your concerns on my article. I have written a better History with sources this evening. This provides more cohesiveness with the items presented to show the single idea of premiums in this context. I will continue to work to make this flow better, and this will be a good article -- with a little help from my friends. As far as stubs go, with what I have added, it already beats the heck out of a lot of what's out there as far as documentation goes. (I have been spending a little time trying to add sources to some of those articles and stubs that interest me, too.) Please stick with me, because Premium (marketing) is an important topic, not covered by other articles on Wikipedia. I welcome your input, and input from anyone else, to fix this thing so it can grow into the type of article you deem acceptable Wikipedia material. I hope other editors will adopt this article and help me out a little with making it meet Wikipedia standards. Please continue to watch my edits as I work to get closer to something you think can be useful and useable. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, --Jeffrey Scott Maxwell (talk) 06:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination is clearly completely unresearched. Even a little exercise with various search tools yields the fact that this concept is amply documented in quite a few textbooks on marketing, and is not a Wikipedia editor "sticking together loosely related topics" but is a readily documented and recognized concept in its field. Wikipedia and AFD do not need zero-effort deletion nominations such as this. Uncle G (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron. SnottyWong ^speak 23:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Clearly an encyclopedic topic, although the article needs cleanup. It is currently almost a complete WP:DEADEND. I'll try to add some links. I'd encourage the nominator to withdraw their nomination, as I can almost guarantee that this nomination isn't going to go anywhere. SnottyWong ^speak 23:50, 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.