Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Money & You


 * 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. There is no significant coverage in independent reliable sources that show the notability of the subject. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Money & You
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of (or sources indicating) notability, apart from the unsourced list of "graduates" (an independent source of the veracity of this list would help its case). In any case, so little info this is barely more than a stub.

Article was originally PRODded; tag removed by an anon. IP. Oli Filth(talk) 21:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This is an important article. Money & You utilizes a different concept on education, utilizing accellerated technologies developed by Lozanav and DePorter. This is completely different from traditional education and many individuals with entries on wiki- Tony Robbins, Robert Kiyosaki, Ben Cohen and Jack Canfield (to name a few) - have all taken this program and many have even taught it prior to developing their own programs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.172.221 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 15 July 2008
 * Right, but none of this is sourced. There are no indication that the subject has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Please read WP:Notability. Oli Filth(talk) 19:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So if sources from additional parties - such as books written by graduates or references on a graduates website - would this suffice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.246.97 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If the coverage conforms to the list at WP:Notability and so forth, then yes, it may suffice. Oli Filth(talk) 20:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your clarification. I have added additional sources for the page, including an article by another party called Networking Times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takacedon (talk • contribs) 22:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As one of these is an article by Cordova, and one narrates a conversation with Cordova, they do not form independent coverage. Oli Filth(talk) 23:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.124.231 (talk) 13:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  21:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, no sources. Recreate if sources are found, this article looks like spam. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 22:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * More articles have been listed citing the development of accelerated learning technologies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.244.157 (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete  This article is conspicuously lacking citations to supports its many claims.  Notability has not been established.  Fails to meet the primary criterion specified in WP:COMPANY.  WP is not a trade directory.  Dolphin51 (talk) 02:52, 25 July 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.