Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of debt


 * 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. Whether to redirect to Debt can be discussed separately.  Sandstein  18:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Criticism of debt

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is unfortunately a bit of a mess right now, as it confuses a lot of different terms and concepts. I think it should be deleted until something better gets created. It conflates many different ideas like usury, credit and public & private debt, that all, while related, are not the same. I think for such a specific article to exist it has to be well written. BeŻet (talk) 09:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions.  —AE  ( talk  •  contributions ) 09:37, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 12:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Redirect to parent article Debt. I am, somewhat regretfully, mostly in agreement with BeZet on this. There's a lot of potential for this to be a great article, as there's a lot that has been written about it, but at the moment it seems partly a POV Fork, but is overall just incomplete. In comparison, the section Debt, while certainly not perfect and definitely under-cited, is more representative and probably a better start. It's also not so long that it would require a split-off into a separate article. Some of the religious content might warrant a merge, but much is better covered in other articles, like usury, Islamic banking and finance, and Loans and interest in Judaism. MarginalCost (talk) 12:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KCVelaga (talk) 00:14, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The title frames the topic in an inherently biased way, contrary to WP:NPOV. Andrew D. (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Poorly developed WP:POVFORK of Usury and specifically Usury. Article title is POVish.Icewhiz (talk) 13:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete more of an essay than an encyclopedia article. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 03:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Weak Redirect. I agree with BeZet and MarginalCost. This could be a great overview article but right now it looks more like a wp:stub. There are so many different aspects that are not covered. Some of these can be found under Debt, Credit theory of money, Fractional reserve banking, Monetary reform, Jubilee Debt Coalition, Debt of developing countries, Neocolonialism, Usury, Islamic banking and finance, Microfinance, Microcredit, Debt bondage, Debt: The First 5000 Years, etc. Some of the contents of this article might be merged into the relevant articles. This problem field is so big and many-faceted that it would be nice with an overview of different kinds of debt and different criticisms with links to the relevant articles as I have listed above. I am in doubt whether such an overview could fit into Debt or it is so big that it needs a separate article. Bolarno (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Rewrite and expand. This is a big topic with many aspects: private debt, national debt, business financing, debt of developing countries, debt-dependence, slavery, credit theory of money, financialization, religion, history, etc. Do you think that a long criticism section would be accepted in the 'debt' article, or would it be rejected as unbalanced or POV? In the latter case, we need to keep, rewrite and expand the Criticism of debt page. Perhaps rename it to something else? Perhaps make a sub-category page under Category:Debt? What do you think? Bolarno (talk) 07:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I just think combining everything into one article is a bit pointless, because it's a lot of very different things. For instance there are economists who strongly criticise financialization and the influence of private banks, but are not opposed to debt per say. I think these topics should be discussed separately, because I don't think there is a single theory or (serious) school of thought that criticises every form of debt. It just seems to me that the original creator of the article was a bit confused by the term. BeŻet (talk) 13:06, 25 September 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.