Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underbanked


 * 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. &mdash;Sean Whitton / 13:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Underbanked

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


 * Delete simple dicdef and neologism. Ave Caesar (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable neologism with a point of view--Pmedema (talk) 14:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a dictionary; non-notable term Jезка  (talk) 15:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - as a dicdef per User:Ave Caesar --T-rex 15:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep While the current article is certainly a mess with NPOV problems, this is an emminently notable topic. Simple google searches show that this is a widely used term on an international level, along with it's alternate terms - unbanked and underserved. Rather than letting this become a snowball before any attempts at improving have been made, I will start on a rewrite of the artcle, although one of the other names may be a better choice. Also note that underserved was previously transwikid as a dicdef. Jim Miller (talk) 15:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - even with the rewrite now, it is an uncited, unreferenced dictionary entry. --Pmedema (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is a stub with much potential since this topic is quite notable. Colonel Warden (talk) 05:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The article went through a rewrite at 06:31, 20 July 2008 by Colonel Warden. It's now fairly well sourced, though it would be nice to find some good web references.  I still feel like unbanked and underbanked are clear neologisms, but these references might help make an acceptable article.  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 14:50, 21 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.