Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five risks


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 04:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Five risks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability, the term five risks is used only in one article and is not generally notable in its own right, it does have a single good reference but that all. The topics covered are all already individual articles in Wikipedia and so this article is just promoting a single academic article and repeating content that is already covered separately in other Wikipedia articles. Sargdub (talk) 20:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I concur that this term is not notable and thus the article should seriously be considered for deletion. I just did a quick search to see if there are other sources that could be added, but none were apparent. Zfeinst (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 23:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. There are many types of financial risk. The authors selected 5 and wrote a paper about them. But is the paper notable? If it was a book, it would have to meet WP:NBOOK. Some papers have been influential enough to merit a separate article, but I don't see any evidence that this is one of them. The External links are just spammy links to investment advice, which is everywhere on the Internet. The sections with "Eta® model" also look pretty spammy. Apparently they refer to the MacroRisk Analytics site, which is half dead -- 404 errors when you click anything. – Margin1522 (talk) 20:50, 5 December 2014 (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.