Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Managed move


 * 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. Consensus is that article as it exists is a dictionary definition, rather than an encyclopedia article, and that it does not present sufficient reliable sources to verify that the term is in widespread usage. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Managed move

 * – (View AfD)

Delete WP:DICT The term is probably specific to a particular country/local region, and has no references, fails WP:ORI. Bardcom (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, needs sourcing and indication this is UK social-work jargon. In the US a "managed move" is something a corporation does for an employee they need to relocate, and there are vendors who do this as a service. It also refers to companies moving their own operations, e.g. consolidating IT in one data warehouse without interruption. --Dhartung | Talk 07:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As a UK teacher, I've heard this phrase used, most recently on a BBC Radio 4 programmes where it was described in the same way as in the article. However, I do not feel it is encyclopaedic: it is not widespread, it appears to be used in some areas and not others, there are alternative ways of describing the same thing and, basically, it is not a new idea but has happened unofficially for years without the need for a name or with other descriptions. My decision reserved, pending evidence that the term is widespread in the social work milieu, as opposed to teaching, and not just a neologism. Emeraude (talk) 14:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Any other opinions? Let's try to avoid a resubmit for consensus.  Can someone look at this please? Bardcom (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete As it is a WP:DICT with a bunch of red links that someone thought satisfied a wikify request. There is not much to lose if someone wants to start a substantial article, if indeed there is an encyclopedic article to be written. Dimitrii (talk) 15:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete It has enough reliable sources if someone really wants to create an article, but a wiktionary entry will do for now.  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  19:09, 25 March 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.