Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global layoffs in 2008 due to the economic crisis


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Global layoffs in 2008 due to the economic crisis

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

An indiscriminate list. What level of layoffs counts as significant for inclusion - or rather, what reliable independent source do we use for what constitutes a significant layoff, and to what extent can we attribute it to the global economic crisis rather than just years of decline, as with Woolworths? MFI retail have been on life-support for years, you can't blame the crisis for that, it was when not if. And do we count layoffs in company failures anyway? Or only in companies that continue to trade? What about companies that continue to trade only on paper?

I think the fundamental premise for this article is flawed. It is much more likely that Wikinews would be the place for a blow-by-blow, until maybe June next year when the timeline articles start getting published in sources. Because, of course, Wikipedia would never be the first place to publish a class of article on any subject. Guy (Help!) 22:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. The current article is heavily biased, a global one will never be complete and it can never be conclusively proven lay-offs are the result of the economic crisis to begin with. For example, a couple of banks went belly up recently - meaning the employees need to look for other work, but they might well have survived if the bank directors chose not to have their ridiculously large bonuses . - Mgm|(talk) 23:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can understand why someone would want this article, but it's not encyclopedic.  Besides, determining what layoffs are the result of the economic crisis is an unmanageable task.  Chicken Wing (talk) 10:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, could never pass WP:NOR. Stifle (talk) 15:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rename title: I think if we can rename the article to Global layoffs in 2008 and keep only layoffs that are of importance, it should be fine. Regarding WP:NOR, I think that's not a problem as every layoff has references to support it. Wiki5d (talk) 06:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * For very few layoffs, however, will you find a citation from a reliable source saying it was due to the economic crisis. Stifle (talk) 12:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * True; but that's why I propose we rename to article to just Global layoffs in 2008 and remove the due to the economic crisis part. And the need for such an article in 2008 alone can be that this year witnessed a much larger number of layoffs than most of the previous years. Wiki5d (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete way too subjective to determine in an encyclopaedic manner what should be included. Michellecrisp (talk) 06:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - subjective; not encyclopedic content; would be subject to hideous regional biases, WP:OR violations, etc. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:17, 2 December 2008 (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.