Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5 C's of Singapore


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 11:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

5 C's of Singapore
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The cited sources do not mention the concept which is the notional subject of the article and do not specifically present the conclusions drawn from them; as such it would appear to be a novel synthesis form those sources. Guy (Help!) 10:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. A Google search for the title turns up 10.8 million hits (granted, not all of them related to the topic). Article could stand to have some proper citations, but appears to be an actual term used. Hermione1980 16:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I appreciate your efforts, but the 10.8 million hits are webpages that have the words "5" "C" "of" and "Singapore". If you search for the exact  phrase in quotes,  the number is fewer.  In between, "5 C's" and "Singapore" shows up  fairly often, so there might be something to this.  Mandsford (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - It might be more appropriate to actually have an article on materialism in Singapore. In trying to find the 5 C's through other means because the string is difficult to search with, I found this.  Note that this version has career instead of country club, and doesn't actually say 5 C's, so a bit weak. -- Whpq (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I found a better source with this. However I still think it might make more sense to have the topic a little broader as materialism in Singapore and document this phrase as en example of it's reference to materialism. -- Whpq (talk) 22:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.