Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-capitalism

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. Herostratus 15:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Post-capitalism

Post-capitalism (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

• Keep. There are some academic essays, books and conferences on this subject. The article is just a stub that needs to be expanded and sourced. -Loremaster 23:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 09:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, a real term of sociology (e.g. this link) and some 23k google hits.--Ioannes Pragensis 13:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I can't see any sign that "post-capitalism" names a determinate concept - rather, the article seems to be about anything that might exist in the future that isn't capitalism. If this is speculation, it seems to fall foul of WP:NOT, if it is about actually existing movements that present an alternative to capitalism, we already have anti-capitalism. Either way, I fail to see what this article could contain apart from an arbitrary list of things that aren't capitalism and might exist after it. Ioannes Pragensis points to a definition from sociology.org.uk, which is support for the academic use of the term - but note that sociology.org.uk isn't using the word in the way the article currently does; rather, it is used as a synonym for postfordism and/or the post-industrial society. If that's the standard academic use of the term, we could redirect. VoluntarySlave 18:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless the article can meet the standards of WP:NEO by adding some references that discuss the usage of this term (simply using the term in an article wouldn't be adequate... Again, see WP:NEO). Tarinth 18:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep 255 GS hits, with sufficient examples that it is being used as a standard term. We do not require an article specifically about the word in its own right. We write articles on subjects, and use the standard designation. Only the subject has to be notable. The title o the article just has to be the word actually used for it. DGG 22:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I've got a book somewhere titled "post-capitalist ...."something or other. I'ts probably keeping the bed from rocking on the floor - which is exactly where I should be right now.Mike 23:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep or redirect if there's a better term. We're actually not in a capitalistic anymore society as the purists might say; that was more of a 19th century -pre-WWII concept. Jakerforever 01:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Notes: I've added an External links section which contains links to some solid references. --Loremaster 03:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and improveThis is a good entry but it should be improved.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 05:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep Needs expansion with sources. Madhava 1947 (talk) 10:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.--Sefringle 01:37, 1 April 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.