Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First-time home buyer grant


 * 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. (non-admin closure) TBrandley (what's up) 00:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

First-time home buyer grant

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While it might be possible to write an article on first-time home buyer grants in general (which is what I was looking for when I found this article) this one just consists of some details on one nation's program, plus some uncited opinions. Kitfoxxe (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable, the article now discusses programs in the United States  and  Australia,  and can be edited and expanded to cover more countries. Deletion is not the solution to the article's shortcomings,  improvement and expansion is.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  04:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy if that could be done. However unless at least one source (and probably more than one) discusses the concept in general, putting information on two programs together to create a topic is original research. Kitfoxxe (talk) 04:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep While the article isn't very well sourced, the reasons for nomination are based on an incorrect interpretation of WP:OR. It's perfectly acceptable to have articles that explain how the same topic is treated in different parts of the world. It's not OR to say that 2 sources that discuss home buyer's grants in detail are both about home buyer's grants. Even if it wasn't OK to keep as is, it could be fixed by renaming/editing/splitting, e.g. to First-time home buyer grant in Australia. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - yeah, this has been analysed to death here in Australia (see plethora of news coverage). Political ramifications, costs, social impacts, etc. I understand the concern about different programs in different countries but I would suggest that just means we need a general intro about what they are and then country-specific examples. Basically, what nom was (rightly) looking for but couldn't find. I reckon it can be done. Stalwart 111  12:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'd rather see this article be about the Australian program and another article about the American one. Kitfoxxe (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * But if they have the same name and are designed to do the same thing, doesn't it make sense to have them together? Isn't it just a matter of properly explaining the US variation in more detail? Stalwart 111  21:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It should be about ALL countries who have, or had, policies along these lines. Luke no 94  (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree; Aus, US and everyone else. Stalwart 111  21:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * So I wonder if this should be merged with First-time buyer which has more of a UK focus? Stalwart 111  23:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that. I don't see why it would be WP:OR to group them together anyway, that argument didn't make sense. Also, if you looked hard enough, I'm sure you'd find something, somewhere, comparing first-time buyer schemes. Luke no 94  (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You way very well be right! Stalwart 111  09:36, 19 February 2013 (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.