Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sequestered Capital Theory


 * 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. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 21:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Sequestered Capital Theory

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Clear Original Research, may be even fringe theory without complying WP:OR, WP:GNG and based heavily on primary sources, who is the proclaimer of the theory. Not suitable for inclusion. ☆★  Mamushir   ( ✉✉ ) 14:26, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. ☆★   Mamushir   ( ✉✉ ) 14:26, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - Given that we have peer-reviewed sources for the theory, I wouldn't call it OR. However, the proponent's theory does not seem to have seen much take up (the articles given have very few non-self-cites, and that coverage does not seem substantial to me), so I agree that the sourcing does not meet the GNG threshold. &mdash; Charles Stewart (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 16:44, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The sourcing is entirely incestuous (sorry, but I find that a useful descriptor for topics with such a small proponent base). Insufficient demonstrated uptake in the field, fails GNG. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:05, 3 January 2021 (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.