Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get-rich-quick schemes


 * 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 speedy redir. DES (talk) 04:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Get-rich-quick schemes
Though it has been edited away from attack article status, it still violates sections of WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:NOT. Redirect. PJM 03:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that most of the article is terribly, perhaps even hopelessly, NPOV; on the other hand, there are a variety of these things that exist (pyramid schemes, some types of multi-level marketing, the "systems" that are sold through infomercials in the early hours of the morning, and one could even argue outright scams and con jobs like 419 scams), and a summary article detailing them in a general sense is both encyclopedic and useful. I think the article badly needs some editing love, but in the mean time, I think it can be cut down into a stub to make it POV, and then added to requests for expansion so that it gets the attention it needs. Or, heck, it could even be put on Pages Needing Attention and left as-is, including the neutrality warning. Some Wikipedian out there is bound to have the expertise and ability to make this a useful survey article.
 * Not a bad suggestion. PJM 04:26, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Agree with FreelanceWizard - worth having an article (although it should be under the singular, Get-rich-quick scheme with the plural redirecting there), but needs cleanup. BD2412  T 04:58, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to get-rich-quick scheme, where we already have a half decent article on this subject. - SimonP 05:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That's the best idea - done. PJM 05:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Redirect to get-rich-quick scheme. Capitalistroadster 05:36, 23 November 2005 (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.