Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wealth Dynamics


 * 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. Courcelles 23:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Wealth Dynamics

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Please see Articles for deletion/Roger James Hamilton. There was some comment at that AFD that this related article should be deleted also. The subject of this article does not appear to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. While there are several references in the article they are either not independent sources or do not do much to establish notability (references not really about Wealth Dynamics). Peacock (talk) 17:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - the AfD has a red link back here, so the nomination is not finished. I would also support deletion, but at the same time, I am concerned that this debate must be extended. Bearian (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The AFD notice was placed on the page, this discussion page was created, the discussion was added to the AFD list, and the article creator was notified. All these necessary steps were done within one minute of each other.  How can it be accurate to say that the "nomination is not finished"?  Peacock (talk) 12:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Blogs and PR pieces in the article currently. I found absolutely nothing in Google News on Wealth Dynamics and a search on Google Books only brought up a few things, some of which appears to be sections written by Hamilton put into other books and the rest just very short pieces that are also PR-ish. A general web search wasn't much help in that regard either. It just seems to be a huge PR thing with no real notability of its own and no one (reliable sources) paying any attention to it. Silver  seren C 03:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I didn't see any notable mentions on Google and Yahoo. SwisterTwister   talk  22:13, 16 August 2011 (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.