Talk:Parametric insurance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on December 2, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

"It is not cleaning of the article - it is not cleaning spam - it is exposing the weakness of wikipedia. How can NIA be spam when details of its address and constitution is available for perusal, it is the organization, which has popularized this concept by developing such product for agro-sector and more importantly crop sector and they have been short listed by World Bank to continue the work globally. Somebody's personal ignorance coupled with arogance should not vitiate a noble creation like wikipedia. But having conveyed this I am also aware - world is crowded with such operations and that is why most powerful idea voted for 21st century is "disruptive technology". " sum

Rather than retaining this whimsically truncated article in the name of cleaning and editing, more justice will be done to readers by deleting this emerging great financial innovation.

Which part of my edit was "whimsical"? Perhaps once this "innovation" is no longer emerging but has actually been established, it will be easier to add useful information to the article. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-17 03:59:05Z

Is it not obvious to you as to the whimsical edit - if you care you know what you ae doing; if you don't, doesn't matter which way it goes. User:sum

No, it is not obvious to me. I admit that I am too often sarcastic in person, but I make a significant effort to avoid sarcasm in my online communications because it is easily misinterpreted. Consensus was to keep this article, and as such, I would like to see it improved. I thought I was doing that, and if I have failed, I would like to know why. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-18 09:20:40Z

Is pastel box a part of your avowed sarcasm - good; keep it up. Wikipedia is a wonderful effort; There will be self-appointments in any effort depending on opportunities. Cleaning Albert Einstein's name from theory of relativity may be cleaning only in dictionary of pastel eyes. Balunga

I find some error of logic on the part of deletion specialists of Wiki (I admit, I am a complete novice but with good intentions and common sense. Even if the images were from some select presentation slides, their presence was making the article comprehensive, illustrative and well understood. After all it is a technical article. Fortunately I have a copy of the material for my complete understanding. Think of a new reader. How can he understand this truncated article. Better delete the whole article and spread ignorance safely as no body would know that such concepts exist. 59.95.40.8Editor: Sum