Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-autistic economics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. --james(talk) 11:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Post-autistic economics

Smells like neulogistic insufficiently-notable concept, so delete, but input, particularly from people acquainted with the area, is requested. --Nlu (talk) 06:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep, I'm hardly an authority on economics, but the term does exist according to this recent article that I found using Google News ('Thousands of economists from scores of countries have also in various forms taken up the cause for broadband economics under the banner "Post-Autistic Economics"'). I'm not sure a "web-based" grassroots organization counts under WP:RS, but I think Adbusters does, as does the Guardian. Also a university-level backup of an old Chronicle of Higher Education article. Certainly this meets most notability standards at this point. -- H·G (words/works) 06:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. It gets 230 hits on a Google Scholar search alone.[1] Vashti 06:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. - even though the term is awkward, it does describe a vitally important way of looking at "economic phenomena". Except if someone can come up with a better term for these phenomena...
  • Keep. This is a movement with considerable pull in academic departments across Europe, and even in the United States. It is a near-social movement articulation of ideas that have circulated in an unorganized form in academic departments for decades. I concur that it would be wrong to delete it. todddc
  • *Keep. People feeling themselves related to this movement should certainly re-consider its name, but still the movement exists and is of growing importance, so it would be absolutely wrong to delete it
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.