Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merchant Sharing


 * 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. Will userfy/move to draft upon request. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:03, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Merchant sharing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on "a new field of economics" first presented in a paper published in November. GScholar shows that it is uncited by others. It may pan out but right now it's just WP:TOOSOON for notability, not to mention that one has to guess from email addresses that the author of the paper is also the author of our article. Mangoe (talk) 16:17, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. It is true, it's a little too soon to have this article, but I will give three arguments to keep it or at least to leave it few weeks until we get more references from other people.
 * Reviewing is currently in progress by several economists. Today, I received only positives returns and it sounds to be a foundation for Economics in digital age. Several French blogs have published papers on Merchant Sharing. But it takes time on the academic domain to publish papers (in English) that may cite the theory.
 * Merchant Sharing opens new opportunities and does not conflict with other traditional topics or news. It is some way standalone and is just linked to 'intangible good'. For educational purpose, it is important that people on Internet, with basic Math background, may understand the democratic ideas behind Merchant sharing
 * This is a very specific topic and may request an exception of Wikipedia rules. Merchant Sharing promotes an open-source, free, without paywall, P2P, secure payment system. This is really a system that advantage open-knowledge on the Net (Wikipedia model) and gives great potential incomes for artists. The more it is known and the speediest citizens get rewards from this. Pelinquin (talk) 09:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Apart from some problems with... assumptions in the article text, the topic just doesn't seem to be notable. When others have discussed it in depth, then we can have an article - which reflects independent commentary. bobrayner (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Userfy or if policy/guidelines/newly-evolving practices allow for it, move to Draft:Merchant sharing ("Draft:" is a new namespace and the rules for use are still being drafted). Get it out of main encyclopedia per WP:TOOSOON but don't lose the content per 3 good arguments made by the primary author,, above.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  02:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Is the draft namespace exempt from Wikipedia is not for things made up one day? bobrayner (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Draft policies, guidelines, and practices are still under active development. I would expect that such things would be strongly discouraged unless there was a reasonable hope that the item would become notable.  The issue here with respect to moving Merchant sharing to Draft: is not the content but whether it will be "okay" to move a page from article-space to Draft: space as a result of a deletion discussion.  I think the "okay-ness" of that is still in flux.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  03:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In principle, I think that the draft namespace is a good idea; but if it does not (yet) have rules for dealing with content that clearly fails core wikipedia principles, and if that lack of rules is even used as a reason for moving such problematic content to the safe-haven of Draft, then I would oppose that outcome for this AfD. bobrayner (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - not sure if Merchant Sharing is in common usage. However, if this article is to be kept it needs references and possibly correcting.  For example, the section 'Particular cases' says Pre industrially. Only one instance of a good can be produced.  But something like a book has physical and information properties.  Many bibles where copied by hand, so there was more than one instance of the information contained. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:27, 24 January 2014 (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.