Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Customer data platform

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Customer data platform

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

This is pretty obviously a piece placed on behalf of "The Customer Data Platform Institute" to market the concept. I had already merged what I could independently source from this article to Customer relationship management in this diff and redirected. SPA creator of this marketing material showed up and has been edit warring to restore, calling the redirection "vandalism" (diff). Baloney. Jytdog (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Correction/Clarification. Clearly the editor clearly misunderstood. The 'Vandalism' was not on the redirect, it was on various edits leading up to the change... see edits prior to jytog. Also, editor failed to acknowledge the subject (not concept) is in practice independent of the one source obsessing over.adtwiki (talk) 20:28, 24, January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 23:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Run of the mill mentions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 23:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- promotional 'cruft for a nn concept. Spam and likely a WP:ADVOCACY placement. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:15, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If content has previously been merged, do we not need to preserve the history of the source page to allow proper attribution of edits through the edit history? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a note to Talk:Customer_relationship_management#Merge_attribution which should cover the legal attribution requirement. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Was already covered in this edit note and this tagging of the talk page, but more is better. Jytdog (talk) 00:54, 1 February 2018 (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.