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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge work productivity

[edit]

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

A personal essay made up of original research promoting the work of Brand Velocity employees (such as Reinvent Your Enterprise, by Jack Bergstrand). Article was created by people (with SPAs) from Brand Velocity as one of multiple spammy articles around their company. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Original research and hyperinflated patent nonsense that's selling something. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete essay that's trying to sell something. Those tables that are apparently from the CEOs book might be copyright infringement, too (?) OSborn^arf_contribs. 17:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article is referenced to many different authors, and there's nothing wrong with the subject. From the lead, Knowledge work productivity is the measure of the efficiency and effectiveness of the output generated by workers who mainly rely on knowledge, rather than labor, during the production process. A search also brings a lot of results [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. Only a couple of them actually use "knowledge work productivity" as a term, but they all talk about the same thing as the article: the development of strategies and tools to enhance and measure the productivity of knowledge workers — Frankie (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- An article discussing the topic that may be called "knowledge work productivity" or something else may be appropriate for an encyclopedia article, this one is not it. It is too irredemiably spam, a personal essay selling Reinvent Your Enterprise and Strategic Profiling. Someone independant maybe able to create a good article but wikipedia is best served by such a person starting from scratch. duffbeerforme (talk) 15:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I disagree that this is pure spam. The advertising manner the book is being used as a reference doesn't turn the actual content into spam, nor does it automatically disqualify the book from being a reliable source. I definitely disagree that it would be best for the next editor to start from scratch. The article contains valuable material and it seems to be well referenced, and it's unreasonable to ask that this content not to be considered simply because it is "suspicious". Lastly, it is not the best for our readers to find just a red link on what is a reasonably valid topic. At the very least this should be merged and redirected to knowledge worker or knowledge management — Frankie (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. Autarch (talk) 03:24, 29 December 2011 (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.