Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arguments for and against the single european currency?




 * 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.

I conclude from this discussion that it's best this page and the related redirected ones are deleted. Thank you for your participation. — Encephalon 16:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for and against the single european currency?
WP:OR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archibald99 (talk • contribs)


 * I got an edit conflict with the AFD when I went to slap a mergeto tag on the article. Any verifiable parts of this article should be merged to Euro. (By the way: I'm being bold and moving the article to get rid of the question mark.  It's annoying) ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 19:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Moved to Pros and Cons of the Euro. Apparently it was a requested article under the original title. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 19:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * (This comment copied from the article's talk page) Being new to Wikipedia I am unclear why this article would be immediately considered for deletion. Merging with other articles make sense.  I did not decide to write this article on my own.  I simply responded to a Wikipedia:Requested Article entry.  I welcome all related guidance. Sympa 19:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC) —The preceding comment was added by ONUnicorn (talk • contribs) 19:48, 2006 September 19  (UTC)
 * Not all requests are necessarily good ideas for articles, especially if the article titles are phrased as questions (which usually indicates that the editor should have gone to Reference desk rather than to Requested articles), and pro and con lists are usually bad ideas. Uncle G 10:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per tag within the article, then turn into a redirect. The article is useful, but surely is not appropriate as a freestanding article. Fiddle Faddle 20:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete out of hand. I don't see anything in this article that isn't OR that isn't already in Euro. No need for a merge. - CheNuevara 21:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, essay in list form. Someone can start over with cited material. Gazpacho 07:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Since the article was nominated for deletion, Sympa has added the following, which seems to be an attempt to source the article; "Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer ... has conducted ... the Five economic tests ... to assess whether it is in the UK's benefit to join the Eurozone or not. His own analysis associated with the Tests cover most of the points mentioned under pros and cons in detail." ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 13:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: OR; WP is not a blog.  Signature brendel  21:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge - didn't read the article, but it might be merged with other Euro related issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YechielMan (talk • contribs) 22:30, 2006 September 20
 * Delete - I've spent a little time trying to revise and condense sections of the Euro article, so I'm fairly familiar with it.  This list offers no additional insight not already provided in the Euro article.  All of the positives are covered at much greater length in the Euro article excepting perhaps #4, which is not an argument for the Euro so much as a statement of fact.  Similarly, argument against #2 is dubious given that it could plausibly appear in the "arguments for" section with very little rewording.  Anyway, there's nothing here that hasn't been explored at greater length elsewhere. Jelklan 17:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Seems to be quite POV to me, and most of the above. It's not even well writen. It refers to the ECB as Europe's Central Bank. - Рэд  хот  15:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. While appreciative of User:Sympa's efforts, I'm afraid this page is redundant as the subject is dealt with in other, more appropriately-titled articles. — Encephalon 15:56, 25 September 2006 (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.