Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narrow banking

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 keep.--Kubigula (talk) 05:23, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Narrow banking (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)

This has been around for four years but appears to be WP:OR, or at best a personal essay on the subject. If the subject is genuinely significant then it needs a complete rewrite to make it compliant with policy and to remove the original research elements such as citing the "early thought leaders" to their own Google sites. Guy (Help!) 16:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there are still a lots of news references waiting to be added on to it. Minimac (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Narrow Banking is a widely-known and notable concept, and is currently big in financial reform circles, having been proposed by Barack Obama amongst others. There are also plenty of notable refs, eg - [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. It does need work, yes, but not deletion -- Boing! said Zebedee 17:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• By "work" I think you mean a complete rewrite to remove the personal essay character and the blatant WP:OR, yes? Please feel free to do that. Guy (Help!) 09:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• There's no obligation on me to do the work myself in order to voice my opinion that the article should not be deleted. -- Boing! said Zebedee 09:32, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep article needs a rewrite and decent in-line citation. --Bejnar (talk) 19:51, 21 February 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.