Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unproductive labour in economic 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Unproductive labour in economic theory

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This is purely original research. The citations to sources are misleading and the sources don't support what's cited to them. It is a pure and simple snow job. There's a proposal to merge it to Productive and unproductive labour but that'd be pointless, because everything in the current article which is worth keeping is already in the proposed merge target. &mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as an original essay. Carrite (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Productive and unproductive labor isn't much better, for what it's worth. Carrite (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The concept of "productive and unproductive labor" is encyclopedic, an esoteric side street shooting off of labor theory of value boulevard. That piece covers this topic well enough and in context; it has sourcing issues but is on target. This piece rambles all over the map. Carrite (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'd just as soon see Productive and unproductive labor go too, but I didn't have time to look into it carefully enough to nominate it.&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * comment see Articles for deletion/Productive and unproductive labour as well.&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, as essay/synthesis. We may have two different articles on the same subject but to be honest I think it would be better if both were deleted and somebody started from scratch at a later date. bobrayner (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * There are probably hundreds of thousands of pieces at En-WP that need a full rewrite. That may or may not be one; it may just need heavy editing; it may be argued that maintaining an imperfect piece is better than nuking it — which is my take. This one seems like a fairly easy call as an inferior fork of Productive and unproductive labour. Carrite (talk) 00:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete OR essay. —Lowellian (reply) 20:45, 26 July 2012 (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.