Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unbooked
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Unbooked (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find any evidence that this is a known business model. (Or that Expedia's business model is described anywhere as "unbooked".) Indeed, the article's author describes it in an edit summary as an "emergent business model", but I don't think Wikipedia is the place for it to emerge. Contested prod. ... discospinster talk 03:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
_____________
I have created a talk page to address this, opening with:
"There is a view that this entry is to be deleted. I think that there is wide usage of this term in publishing, accounting practice and a variety of business models. While I am but one author, I would like to see this entry remain providing the opportunity for other authors to continue to expand this entry with greater context, relevance and utility to the community."
Jeffdusting 09:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment: The new information that has been put in the article about the Unbook Movement has to with "book" as a printed medium, but the rest of the article has to do with "booking" as in "making reservations". It's not clear what the article is really referring to. ... discospinster talk 15:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Not sure if WP:DICTIONARY, WP:SPAM, or WP:NEO fits better. Jminthorne (talk) 08:06, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as incoherent. Apparently about two different subjects, neither of them with any sources or likely notability. DGG ( talk ) 01:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, agree with DGG. Also non-notable neologisms, dictionary definitions, and original research musing. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:51, 7 May 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.