Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Networked information economy


 * 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 redirect to Yochai Benkler -- Samir 22:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Networked information economy

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Initially speedy-deleted as lacking assertion of notability and promotional requiring a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic. Taken to deletion review (see discussion here), where I agreed to undelete and send it here for discussion.

My opinion: should be deleted as lacking independent notability. The author of the book is notable; the book is not independently notable; there is no evidence that this particular term from the non-notable book is notable. Article is a quotefarm, and no way to fix that problem without high quality independent, reliable secondary sources dealing with this particular concept. In their absence, delete the article and cover this term as needed in the article on the book author. MastCell Talk 02:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't know about notability, but this is obviously a synthesis from primary sources. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, and should be citing from secondary sources. eaolson 02:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Eaolson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfigura (talk • contribs) 03:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or perhaps merge and redirect. This term seems to have no currency outside of its originator - probably because it's actually rather generic. Guy (Help!) 15:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - term of art which has received a fair bit of attention from academic sources; also seems to have already become somewhat genericized, suggesting independent notability as a TOA. — xDanielx T/C 01:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But what does it say that is not inherently obvious from the title? Guy (Help!) 11:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. The term having been coined by a Harvard Professor (and co-director of the Berkman Center) is finding popularity of use. The use within academic circles is on the increase and this is likely to continue for the foreseeable future due to the high impact nature of his latest book. What needs to happen rather than deletion is expansion including referencing other sources now citing the term. leedryburgh 16:00, 3 September 2007 (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.