Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gazundering


 * 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 redirect to Gazumping. The page's Revision history remains available is anyone is interested in merging content. North America1000 17:40, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Gazundering

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I think this falls under WP:neo. It's a 'humorous' (per google) term that was created in the late 1980s re real estate sales. I don't think this adds anything to wp, and it certainly doesn't appear to be a unique concept. I would support a merge/rd, but I'm not sure what target would be proper. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ  13:36, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

A Guy into Books (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge. With Gazumping, it seems rather WP:DICTDEF to have its own article. It is a legal term this is accepted to refer to a negotiation tactic which is similar to Gazumping, but done by the other party in the opposite way (so ironically not really that similar). It is only used in context to real estate contracts. The buyer offering less than the agreed price, thereby breaking the deal is Gazundering, the seller accepting more from anther party, thereby breaking the deal is Gazumping, both words from the Yiddish gezumph meaning ‘overcharge’. Gazundering can be seen as a form of extortion, since the seller may be forced to sell at the lower price due to circumstance, especially if they have committed to other contracts on the strength of the agreement.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:18, 6 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment There is press coverage of the topic from a period of several years, so there may be a bit more to say about it than the current stub (one article even argues that it's a good thing) and it has some notability. Whether it is better to merge or not is another question. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:18, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * otwithstanding the coverage, I'm not sure that enough can be written about it to merit an article, whereas it would significantly add to the related gazumping article. hence my !vote for merge. A Guy into Books (talk) 13:31, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Gazumping, which is an existing article section with a very similar definition of the term. I don't agree that it's WP:NEO, as the term has been in use in the UK since the early 1990s recession, at least, and it's been used in the US since the financial crisis. Fiachra10003 (talk) 01:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Gazumping per . It's a real term and behavior that and has been around for decades. The redirect places it in better context for the readers. No prejudice to re-creation if an editor wants to create an article based on relaible sources. --Mark viking (talk) 21:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Optakeover (U)(T)(C) 17:10, 20 September 2017 (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.