Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Financial dynamics

The article Financial dynamics seems to be pushing unexplained "proprietary econometric forecasting techniques". I don't find the term Financial Dynamics to be in common use. References in the article are only to two recent books by the same author, who seems to be the same person who placed the article here. Looks like an attempt at advertising the books. Jallan 14:02, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * seems alright to me, needs cleanup though. Did you speak with User:Westland? Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 13:56, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Hmmmmmmmm. The publisher is as solid as can be, so I don't think this is silliness by any measure.  Indeed, I suspect we're dealing with an expert, here.  My concern is that the prose is as thick as a whale omlette right now and is not at all clear enough for an encyclopedia.  Given the fact that this is expert writing, I'm not sure we can have anyone but an MBA clarify.  Clean up, yes, but it would be even better if we could find Business as a Wikipedian by interests and page that person. Geogre 14:30, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not saying this is silliness or crank or bad. But "financial dynamics" as used in this article is just another individual jargon name for a system, one of thousands of such systems (many of them good) pushed by individuals in financial management books and career management books and so forth. At best grabbing a catch phrase to cover his "original research". And Google gets only 841 hits for "Financial Dynamics" Westland, almost all of them being mentions on book dealer websites or pages with an identical puff peace repeated as a review. No-one seems to be seriously reviewing the book. No-one is citing it or referring casually to Westland's revolutionary financial dynamics system. And probably no-one but Westland is using financial dynamics as he uses it and this article uses it. This is not an article on financial dynamics, but a marketdroid puff piece on "Westland's Financial Dynamics". If Westland and his ideas are notable, then they will get into Wikipedia eventually without him (or someone posing as him) placing them here. No cleanup of someone's advert! Jallan 15:15, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed 100% w/ Jallan's comments here. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:11, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I can be a little slow. I understood Jallan's original point only after voting.  I suppose I have to say delete, but I wish that Westland could help us out on our paltry business coverage.  At the same time, I think "dynamics of finance" is a big topic that we need material on, so "financial dynamics" seemed to be a logical lodge point for it.  Geogre 17:00, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: advert. "Financial dynamics" gets a few web hits as a generic term for "dynamics of finance", and many more as the name of a company and as the title of User:Westland's book. Financial dynamics as described in the article is entirely Westland's particular approach. User:Westland also planted three promo links for financial dynamics in discounted cash flow. I guess he wanted to make sure readers got the hint. There's no point to try to contact User:Westland -- he posted his advert on June 1 and hasn't been back since. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:50, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * It's been independently published by a reputable publisher so it's not original research. The content all holds together - you certainly could consider all those factors when calculating a valuation.  I'm going to vote delete because this content is the unhelpful jargon that you'd read on the dust jacket of the text.  There is not enough real material to successfully understand or evaluate his approach.  Lastly, delete because I can find no significant evidence that this methodology is in use outside his own classroom.  It's certainly not mentioned in either of my valuations texts, has not been discussed in Harvard Business Review and has not come up in any other journal I follow.  Rossami 06:26, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advertisement.  --Viriditas 22:39, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)