Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accounting for risk

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 without redirect (Risk Aversion & Management didn't specifically use 'accounting') SkierRMH (talk) 08:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accounting for risk

Accounting for risk (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Seems to be an essay rather than anything encylopaedic; I am not sure wikipedia is the right place for this. Oopsadoodle (talk) 04:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, nothing but an essay, not the right place for essays. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 05:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Per the above. It is an essay. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete essay, per above. Perhaps a redirect to Risk aversion might be worthwhile. Pete.Hurd (talk) 05:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Hammer1980·^talk 09:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Looks like a rewrite for Risk management. --Blanchardb-Me^MyEars_MyMouth-timed 12:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 14:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• I do not agree that the article should be deleted. The subject is appropriate for a Wikipedia article. The article is better researched than the norm. The Articles for Deletion page states "Before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, mentioning your concerns on the article's discussion page, and/or adding a "cleanup" template, instead of bringing the article to AfD. If you can fix the article through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD." This article is a case for improvement, not deletion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.200.11 (talk • contribs)
• Delete Looks like an essay. — Wenli ^{(reply here)} 00:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• As mentioned by one user above, this is an appropriate topic for a Wikipedia article. Those who are unhappy with the content or structure of the article please leave constructive comments which will assist the author in improving the article rather than suggesting it should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaireLunday (talk • contribs) 12:48, 29 November 2007 (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.