- 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 redirect to Mirror trading. (non-admin closure) czar · · 05:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Copy trading (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Copy trading is the same as Mirror trading, and there is no reason why there should be two articles at the moment, not to mention this article's unencyclopaedic language. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Mirror trading. A Google Books search shows that mirror trading is the most common name for the topic. Though that article is unreferenced and needs work, it seems to be more neutrally written and encyclopedic than this one. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Not the same as a mirror trade. It is a different entity and notable enough. History2007 (talk) 19:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LFaraone 00:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LFaraone 00:40, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.