Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recession of 2008


 * 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 no consensus so keep for now. It is a well-sourced stub about a notable and controversial topic. The delete votes, while more numerous, appear to be arguments about content, not WP:CRYSTAL. Bearian (talk) 00:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Recession of 2008

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

According to the definition of a recession:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession

"In macroeconomics, a recession is a decline in a country's gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters of a year."

As of 2/28/08, there is no "recession of 2008," nor any indication that one is imminent. This page should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fp19691 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 28 February 2008


 * STRONG KEEP . The article has verifiable primary sources (BBC, Reuters, USA Today, Business Week and others) and fulfills the requirements of WP:REF for citing them. The reasoning behind this AfD borders on original research. It doesn't matter what one might think ... the sources say otherwise. Truthanado (talk) 00:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rename. Discussion below convinces me that the article has merit and should be renamed. The Devil&#39;s Advocate's suggestion is a good one. Truthanado (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete While there is clearly financial turmoil on the markets calling it a recession now is a little unwarranted. There may very be call for an article with this name in a half a year or so, but having this page now is jumping the gun really. Alberon (talk) 14:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete (but possible merge as I'll get to in a moment) as premature because those sources are still speculating. A recession doesn't occur until an official announcement of same is made. However, before deleting I recommend checking to see if the sources can be added to another article as I do believe there is already an article on the economic uncertainty. A subsection of that article saying "Media speculation in January-February 2008 is rife that a recession had begun" would be appropriate. I've read opinion that the recession started last fall, too, so to say it started in January 2008 actually borders on POV and OR. And there's already one media source (CNN Headline News' commentator Glenn Beck) on record speculating this could actually end up being a depression. So to label it a recession is probably premature at this stage which would then bring in WP:CRYSTAL. 23skidoo (talk) 15:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Controversy over whether the recession of 2008 is valid or not should be included on the page, but it's a notable concept that is useful to be able to look up.Jgebis (talk) 15:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It's all speculative, and we won't know if it's a recession until it's over (if it ever occured at all). -- TBC !?!  16:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have to say delete per WP:CRYSTAL. We’re scarcely 2 months into 2008, after all. — Travis talk  17:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rename This should probably be renamed to something more appropriate. We have an article for the The Chinese Correction which was just a huge stock market plunge, the events so far this year certainly demand some article since it led to legislation we have an article on, which was intended precisely to deter a recession.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 18:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete this is still a matter of debate as evidenced by reading the newspaper. JJL (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not pass WP:CRYSTAL, and considering its still March... -  Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  21:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as speculation at this point. Current economic trends can be duly noted in the appropriate articles, but we can't call something a recession until it actually happens. Wikipedia is not a fortune teller Mr Senseless (talk) 23:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete speculative - CRYSTAL -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 23:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The article can't be deleted under WP:CRYSTAL because it is not about a future event or speculation on a future event. The article instead says such a recession is already underway. The article says we are in a recession not that we're gonna be in one and cites a report from a major banking company to verify it. This means the article suffers from POV, not speculation or original research. This article needs to be renamed to a more neutral title and expanded to cover the whole range of issues and opinions on whether it's a recession, slump, or depression. Everyone agrees there's a downturn. Something like economic downturn of 2008 might be suitable.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 23:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rename. There is definitely some sort of economic disturbance right now (that could lead to a recession), and whether it is a recession or not doesn't really justify a delete, it justifies a renaming of the article. Near-recessions like the ones we're definitely in are regular occurrences, but they're so far apart that each are quite notable. hateless 00:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete we're two months in, not two quarters Will (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep As someone said, its a matter of debate among the sources. since these sources debating it includes essentially every news and financial source in the country (or the world), the question of whether it exists would be notable even if t=it turns out to be merely an unpleasant mirage. UFOs aren't notable because of being real, but because people talk about them. DGG (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. We won't know if there's a recession until June, no? john k (talk) 20:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. If I may be allowed to add a second opinion... It seems wrong to delete an article that has valid sources that all say basically the same thing. This discussion is more about whether there is a recession than about whether the article should be deleted, which is the purpose of this discussion. I suggest, therefore, that renaming the article to something that doesn't contain the word recession is a reasonable thing to do. There is at least one suggestion for a new article name in the discussion above. Other suggestions would be welcome. I offer "Economic situation in 2008" or similar. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 02:35, 5 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.