Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Business contract hire


 * 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! 06:11, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Business contract hire

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No independent coverage supporting notability. And does not pass WP:ORGDEPTH, which is also perhaps appropriate. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 22:44, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Comment I think the nom has misunderstood the article. While article is in bad shape atm, this is a well known financial term used to describe a particular way of leasing vehicles. Mattg82 (talk) 23:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate that it is a well-known term in UK finance, but I think is more appropriate to cover it as a section in vehicle leasing or define it in Wiktionary. There does not seem to be enough encylopaedic content to require a standalone article. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 00:10, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Merging with vehicle leasing is a reasonable outcome for this afd. Mattg82 (talk) 22:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge as proposed (in fact merge looks unanimous, even the nominator seems to favor it). --MelanieN (talk) 00:59, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comments: Hold the horses up. There are not enough independant sources to advance notability for a stand-alone article. I am pretty sure current evidence will show that not only is this article and claims that ...this is a well known financial term used to describe a particular way of leasing vehicles., not as notable as claimed, or someone determined that sourcing is a thing of the past with Wikipedia. I will contest my first ever closing "if" it is advanced that we merge unsourced (a good sign of original research) content to another article. Consensus is not just a head count (straight vote) but please note the included: "Many closures are also based upon Wikipedia policy. As noted above, arguments that contradict policy are discounted.". I would suggest that "if" someone has interest in keeping the content (merge) then surely for such a "well known term" at least on proper source can be included. Personally I would think sourced content can be a plus to the suggested target and that article can be expanded to include world-wide coverage. The alternative would be to consider the content WP:OR, possibly synthesis, certainly violating content policies and guidelines, and the recourse would be to just delete. Otr500 (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per the "policy" section of Closing discussions. A HEY! would be some sourcing then a possible merge. Otr500 (talk) 01:59, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As nominator, I share this opinion. And just to clarify, my earlier reply about potentially adding a section to Vehicle Leasing would be for referenced content on the topic, not merging it in its current form. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 02:17, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. If the term was well known enough to meet criteria for notability, it would be seen in reliable sources. Ifnord (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 15:17, 24 January 2018 (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.