Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inequality within publicly traded companies


 * 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 Userfy. (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07  ( T ) 01:14, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Inequality within publicly traded companies

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A personal essay. Wikipedia is not the place for original research. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Delete While I am sympathetic to the author and think that some of this material, when sourced, might properly exist in other articles, this is clearly a WP:Essay and as such, belongs on a user page, not as an independent article. Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 03:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep or Userfy - This appears to be a class project. On a side note, the talk page does seem to have been used as a "peer-review" forum. As for the AFD, I would err on the side of being nice and encourage improvements to the article rather than deleting it all-together. GabeIglesia (talk) 10:14, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you think anything in this article is actually salvageable? The style is that of a polemic, not an encyclopedia article. There are no sources whatsoever. The article topic itself is promoting a point of view. "Being nice" isn't an excuse for paying no attention to Wikipedia's policies. Nwlaw63 (talk) 10:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hmm. I had a look at the article again, and the lack of citations is concerning. And I also see how the style is rather polemic. As for "being nice," I think WP:DONTBITE is a policy worth considering - although not necessarily one that is superior to other policies. Considering it's a student project (which by no means am I arguing is necessarily a reason to automatically keep it), it's probably best to move it to the creator's sandbox or userpage. GabeIglesia (talk) 06:38, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Userfy back to with an admonition about WP:OR. — Jkudlick t c s 03:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I also recommend WMF contacting Kent State University to remind them of guidelines and policies regarding articles. See also Articles for deletion/Transportation inequality in the United States. — Jkudlick t c s 03:48, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:20, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Draft and userfy at best as there is imaginably a better acceptable article later but there's hardly much currently aside from what would seem like a journal report. SwisterTwister   talk  06:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Draft and userfy would also be fine. Nwlaw63 (talk) 23:47, 10 December 2015 (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.