User talk:Axlbest

Hi Axl, if you are new and need help, look at Help:Contents/Getting started. man liest sich--Symposiarch (talk) 20:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Thank you for your recent contributions, such as Mobile marketing research. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft version first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, without the risk of speedy deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 08:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mobile marketing research

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mobile marketing research requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. andy (talk) 08:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Mobile marketing research

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Mobile marketing research, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion notice, which will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved it to User:Axlbest/sandbox. Do not move it back until it actually has some content and, above all, has proper references. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review: Mobile marketing research

The article is written clearly. It is clearly structured, from beginning to the end. I could not find any written or content errors. The backround could be a bit more detailed. The juxtaposition of the Disadvantages / Difficulties and Advantages / Possibilities pleases me well. The whole article is based on a detailed reference. Good Job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoHomeFreddy (talk • contribs) 13:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review: Mobile marketing research

The article "Mobile marketing research" seemed at first too demanding for a new wikipedia user. I thouhgt it would be easier to treat a less complex topic first, to familiarize with wikipedia. This skepticism was been refusedin the first paragraph. The article gives a clear structure and a common thread is always visible. The focus is on current researches and the current state of the art. The article raises no issues and is covered with enough references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoHomeFreddy (talk • contribs) 13:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review: Mobile marketing research

This article gives a nice overview over mobile marketing research, which is a pretty actual topic nowadays. It has a good structure and defines the advantages and disadvantages of this kind of market research very well. Furthermore, the article is well cited. This gives the reader other references for a deeper understanding of the topic. To improve the article a bit, I would suggest extending the summary (maybe by shifting the background). Thus, the reader would probably get a faster and better impression of the topic at once. Please have a look at the categories at the end of the article - the links were not accepted by Wiki.

I would be interested in the success of mobile marketing research. I know that it is pretty new, but do there already exist figures e.g. about response rates or so?

Finally, I think your topic is a very interesting one, which has been well explained by you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scheubi84 (talk • contribs) 09:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary:Mobile marketing research

Your Article about “Mobile marketing research” is very well written and intelligible. The text is well structured, so it is easy for the reader to get a good overview of this complex and modern topic. Your English is very elevated, fitting for this academic topic.

But sometimes I got the impression that the article reflects your own opinion too much, for a scientific essay.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading your article and hope that this comment helped you out a little.

Good luck and great job! Einsteinsinnfrei

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Einsteinsinnfrei (talk • contribs) 14:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]