Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strategic hiring in digital 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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strategic hiring in digital marketing

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is an essay, based on the author's own views. There's no indication that the references support what is written. There's no evidence of this being a notable subject. While not a reason for deletion, there remain no links to this article. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is spam from a single purpose account probably intended to support someone’s business with a piece of “thought leadership” dumped on Wikipedia to take advantage of the SEO. Mccapra (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT, WP:PUFF, WP:SPAM, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:GNG. I think somebody whose native language is English wrote this, but I'm not certain. It's such a huge pile of puffery and spam that I don't know where to begin to fix it. The topic itself is too detailed be be more than an middle-school essay -- somewhere else. Bearian (talk) 23:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I work in communications/marketing and I struggle to understand what value this article adds to Wikipedia. I can see from the history that there have been multiple requests for the article to be improved. Given the lack of response / changes, I agree that deletion makes sense. - Dyork (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2020 (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.