Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Franklin Income Fund


 * 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 of the debate was - kept

Franklin Income Fund
advertising--[[User:Marie Rowley|Marie | Talk]] 01:46, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC) Comment Ruthlessly cleaned; above discussion refers to [this revision]. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:00, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Blatant spamvertising. Delete. Hoary 02:15, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertising. I suspect this is a copyvio, too, though I haven't been able to locate the source. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 02:22, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are only facts. Cleanup required. Feel free to write facts that they instead were crooks, embezzlers, etc., but not stick labels. Mikkalai 02:47, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a complete non-notable mutual fund, just like hundreds of other balanced income funds in the "large/value" section of the Morningstar style box. What makes this one so important that it should have an encyclopedia article about it? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 03:04, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Hundreds of thou people are using it. Surely it is more notable than a gross of rap singers here. Mikkalai 03:27, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * How exactly is this SPAM? I disagree.  Since this article appears noteworthy I'm going to err on the side of keep unless of course someone can provide good reason not to. [[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 03:52, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. As noted above, this is just one of many thousand mutual funds out there, and lacks any individual notability. Deletionist 05:03, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The individual notability is that someone bothered to put it here. There are thousands of other things out there no one bothered to describe. So what? Mikkalai 07:42, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable, reads like advertising. --fvw* 05:08, 2004 Nov 24 (UTC)
 * It reads like description, unless you want to smear it with dirt. Mikkalai 07:42, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Advertising as it stands. If cleaned up and made NPOV, it will be possible to keep it.  Those interested in keeping it should do some cleaning.  Geogre 05:36, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, not really an ad, but I tried to make it less like one anyways. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  07:30, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep but cleanup one of America's/the world's oldest giant mutual funds, which certainly wouldn't have bothered making such a lame spamvertisement of its own accord. Would suggest a merge if I knew of a likely target that existed (Franklin Templeton Investments doesn't...) Samaritan 08:02, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Huh? The Massachusetts Investors Trust (now MFS Investment Services) dates back to 1924. Franklin only dates back to 1947. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 14:48, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Slightly more notable than most mutual funds, but still below my threshold of inclusion. jni 08:34, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep if a non-advert version can be made. As it stands it's almost certainly a copyvio -- past performance does not guarantee future results is obligatory adspeak. Agreed w/ Mikkalai about the significance of this topic. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:51, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * It is de facto obligatory SEC report/filing speak, not ad speak. Mikkalai 16:28, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Right. What's relevant here is that the presence of the phrase suggests strongly that it was copied from elsewhere. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:10, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete unless cleaned up. Does seem to be more notable than other funds (4000 hits, compared to 60-800 for other funds offered by my former employer's 401k plan that I googled), but I think Wikipedia would be better served by an article on the parent company Franklin Templeton Investments ("franklin templeton" gets 249,000 hits), so if cleaned up, it could be moved there to serve as the beginning of that article. Niteowlneils 19:33, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd support moving it there as well. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  21:38, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Ditto. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:31, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed: A cleaned up version of it should go under that title. Geogre 15:25, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * weak Keep --fvw* 23:06, 2004 Nov 25 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cribcage 20:25, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Franklin Templeton - The parent company is one of the largest in the industry and manages dozens of funds like the Frankin Income Fund. mydogategodshat 03:50, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree with Move/Merge. -leigh 09:31, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. --[[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 18:10, 29 Nov 2004 (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.