Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge process outsourcing: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:09, 16 February 2012

Latest revision as of 07:23, 12 February 2022

(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''

<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. [[User:Martijn Hoekstra|Martijn Hoekstra]] ([[User talk:Martijn Hoekstra|talk]]) 16:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

===[[Knowledge process outsourcing]]===

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|S}}

:{{la|Knowledge process outsourcing}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge process outsourcing|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 13#{{anchorencode:Knowledge process outsourcing}}|View log]]</noinclude>)

Line 29 ⟶ 35:

*'''Keep''' The article's subject is notable (see [[User:Colonel Warden|Warden]]), while the article itself is very, very poor. It's no [[WP:OR]] but has to be improved (references!). --[[User:Tom1492|Tom1492]] ([[User talk:Tom1492|talk]]) 09:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

*'''Comment'''. I'm not wholly convinced that academic discussions or proposals for new business models automatically make them notable. But if the consensus of the community is that this subject is in fact substantive enough to deserve coverage, I'd propose stubbing this and replacing its text entirely with a brief paragraph condensed out of Warden's source, which at least is semi-intelligible and not paywalled. - [[User:Ihcoyc|Smerdis of Tlön]] - [[User talk:Ihcoyc|killing the human spirit since 2003!]] 15:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' TOPIC is notable, ARTICLE is terrible. Someone should really rewrite it... [[User:My2011|My2011]] ([[User talk:My2011|talk]]) 19:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>