Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debt evasion

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 01:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Debt evasion

Unsourced. I'm not sure how notable this is; it can probably be merged into another article of some sort. Cssiitcic (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Speedy delete per the PROD tag you seem to have missed ;-) ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 17:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant to say "delete" all along, wasn't thinking straight. Sorry!! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 17:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! I removed the prod tag due to this AfD being open. Reason for prod was: "Seems to be a non-notable topic, original research etc." KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine, I kind of suspected that it would end up at AfD anyway!! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 17:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In addition to arguments already put forth, the article seems to be taking a how-to or how-not-to tone. Borderline WP:NOTHOWTO. KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A search here indicates this term is used fairly often, yet no in-depth, third party publication seems to deal with the word itself; everything seems to be simply using the term, not describing it. This means the article fails WP:NEO and deletion is in order. The Seeker 4 Talk 18:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, so is not supposed to be about the term, but about the subject of debt evasion. Many of those sources do provide substantial discussion of the subject. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: While a google search of the exact term yields 1290 hits, which vary in reliability, a google news archive search with all date yields 48, a google books search yields 221, and a google scholar search yields 54. Within these, it is likely enough reliable sources can be found. Hellno2 (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep I was in the middle of writing this article when someone just went and proposed it for deletion without even giving it a chance. It takes time to write an article. And I did not have a chance to place references here. I do indeed have some sources. But they are not in front of me now. If you want to be really kind, close this out as a keep, and give me a chance. I will award you a barnstar if you do. Then I can work on this at my own pace. Boston south station (talk) 19:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please continue to work on the article while the discussion is ongoing. At the very least your content may be useful to merge into Debtor. At best, we will have a reliably sourced article on this subject. –xeno (talk) 01:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As Hellno2 points out, this is a widely-discussed topic, and there are no shortage of sources. Looking through the article, I see no problems with a 'howto' tone as suggested. Additional sources are required, but that isn't grounds for deletion. JulesH (talk) 18:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional sources may be found using other terms, as well, of course. There are plenty of hits for "debt avoidance" as well, and I'm sure other terms can be used to search for documents on this topic too. JulesH (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Apart from the clear notability seen by glancing through the snippets displayed by Google in the searches above, here's a whole book on the subject. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:50, 30 March 2009 (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.